U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  I. 


RELIEF    MAP 

CALIFORNIA 

PHOTOGRAPHED 
ORIGINAL 


RELIEF  MAP  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


BULLETIN  No.  100. 

U.S.   DEPARTMENT    OF    AGRICULTURE, 

OFFICE    OF    EXPERIMENT    STATIONS, 

A.   C.  TRUE,    Director. 
Irrigation   liivrxtiifHlioiiK,   I  l\\  .....I    u<  ;nl.   I  \  IM-II  In  <  h:!i-^.-. 


REP  0  li  T 


t'XIlKR    TIIK    DIlIKI-nilN    OK 


ELWOOD    IVIEA^D, 


ASSISTKl)    ]!Y 


WILLIAM  E.  SMYTHE,  MAR8DEN  MAN80N,  J.  M.  WILSON,  CHARLES  D.  MARX,  FRANK  80ULE, 
0.  E.  GRUNSKY,  EDWARD  M.  BOGGS,  and  JAMES  D.  SCHUYLER. 


WASHINGTON: 

OOVEKNMEVT    PRINTING     OFFICE. 
1901. 


"3X 


LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS  OF  THE  OFFICE  OF   EXPERIMENT  STATIONS  ON  IRRIGATION. 

Bui.  36.  Notes  on  Irrigation  in  Connecticut  ami  New  Jersey.     By  C.  S.  Phelps  and  E.  B.  Voorhees. 

Pp.  64.     Price,  10  cents. 
Bui.  58.  Water  Rights  on  the  Missouri  River  and  its  Tributaries.     By  Elwood  Mead.     Pp.  30.     Price, 

10  cents. 
Bill.  60.  Abstract  of  Laws  for  Acquiring  Titles  to  Water  from  the  Missouri  River  and  its  Tributaries, 

with  the  Legal  forms  in  Use.     Compiled  by  Klwood  Mead.     Pp.  77.     Price,  10  cents. 
Bui.  70.  Water-Right  Problems  of  Bear  River.     By  Clarence  T.  Johnston  and  Joseph  A.  Breckons. 

Pp.  40.     Price,  15  cents. 

Bui.  78.   Irrigation  in  the  Rocky  Mountain  States.     By  J.  0.  Ulrich.     Pp.  64.     Price,  10  cents. 
Bui.  81.  The  Use  of  Water  in  Irrigation  in  Wyoming.     By  B.  C.  Kuffum.     Pp.  5<i.     Price,  10  cents. 
Bui.  86.  The  Use  of  Water  in  Irrigation.     Report  of  investigations  made  in  1899,  under  the  super- 
vision of  Elwood  Mead,  expert  in  charge,  and  C.  T.  Johnston,  assistant.     Pp.  253.     Price, 

30  cents. 

Bui.  87.  Irrigation  in  New  Jersey.     By  Edward  B.  Voorhees.     Pp.  40.     Price,  5  cents. 
Bui.  90.  Irrigation  in  Hawaii.     By  Walter  Maxwell.     Pp.  48.     Price,  10  cents. 
Bui.  92.  The  Reservoir  System  of  the  Cache  la  Poudre  Valley.     By  E.  S.  Nettlete-n.     Pp.  48.     Price, 

15  cents. 
Bui.  96.   Irrigation  Laws  of  the  Northwest  Territories  of   Canada  and  Wyoming,   with  Discussions. 

By  J.  S.  Dennis,  Fred  Bond,  and  J.  M.  Wilson.     Pp.  90.     Price,  10  cents. 

FAKMEKM'  BULLETINS. 

Bui.    46.  Irrigation  in  Humid  Climates.     By  F.  H.  King.     Pp.  27. 
Bui.  116.  Irrigation  in  Fruit  Growing.     By  E.  J.  Wiekson.     Pp.  IS. 
Bui.  138.  Irrigation  in  Field  and  Garden.     By  E.  J.  Wiekson.     Pp.  40. 

'For  those  publications  to  which  a  price  is  affixed  application  should  be  made  to  the  Superin- 
tendent of  Documents,  Union   Building,   Washington,  D.   C.,  the  officer  designated  by  law  to  sell 
Government  publications. 
2 


LHTTER  OP  TRANSMITTAL 


U.  S   DEPARTMENT  OF  AGHICULTUHK, 

OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS, 

HW//X'/f»»,  I).  6'.,  June  15,  1901. 

SIK:  I  have  the  honor  to  transmit  herewith,  and  to  recommend  for  publication,  a 
report  on  irrigation  investigations  conducted  in  California  during  1900  by  the  Office 
of  Experiment  Stations  in  cooperation  with  the  California  Water  and  Forest  Asso- 
ciation, under  the  supervision  of  Prof.  Elwood  Mead,  expert  in  charge  of  irrigation 
investigations  in  this  Office.  The  investigations  consisted  of  observations  by  irriga- 
tion experts  on  the  existing  legal,  engineering,  and  agricultural  conditions  along  nine 
typical  streams  used  for  irrigation  in  the  State.  The  growing  value  and  increasing 
scarcity  of  water  are  creating  an  imperative  need  for  better  laws  to  control  the  dis- 
tribution of  streams  in  California,  and  there  is  much  public  interest  in  this  subject  in 
the  State.  The  general  conclusions  agreed  to  by  all  of  the  agents  and  experts  taking 
part  in  the  investigations,  with  the  views  set  forth  in  their  separate  reports,  will,  it 
is  believed,  indicate  the  nature  of  the  reforms  required  to  put  agriculture  under 
irrigation  in  California  on  a  more  enduring  and  satisfactory  basis,  and  thus  to  promote 
the  more  rapid  and  successful  development  of  the  State's  resources. 
Respectfully, 

A.  C.  TKUE,  Director. 
Hon.  JAMES  WILSON, 

Secretary  of  Ayr  culture. 


91224 


LETTER  OF  SUBMITTAL 


U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE, 

OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS, 

IRRIGATION  INVESTIGATIONS, 

Cheyenne,  Wyo. ,  June  1,  1901. 

SIR:  I  have  the  honor  to  submit  for  publication  the  report  of  an  investigation 
of  the  irrigation  problems  of  California  made  under  my  supervision  during  1900,  but 
carried  out  by  the  experts  in  charge  with  only  general  directions  from  me. 

The  reports  of  these  experts  aim  to  present  an  accurate  statement  of  existing 
conditions  along  nine  streams  in  different  parts  of  the  State,  which  are  believed  to 
be  typical  of  what  exist  elsewhere.  The  names  of  those  in  charge  and  the  location 
of  their  labors  are  as  follows: 

Name  of  expert.  Name  of  stream. 

William  E.  Smythe Susan  River. 

Marsden  Manson  Yuba  River. 

James  M.  Wilson Cache  Creek. 

C.  E.  Grunsky Kings  River. 

Frank  SouUS San  Joaquin  River. 

C.  D.  Marx Salinas  River. 

Edward  M.  Boggs Los  Angeles  River. 

James  D.  Schuy  ler San  Jacinto  River  and  Sweetwater  River. 

In  submitting  their  reports  these  experts  have  acknowledged  their  obligations 
for  assistance  received  from  the  following  persons: 

William  E.  Smythe  to  his  assistants,  Albert  Halen,  C.  E.,  of  Standish,  and 
W.  D.  Minckler,  of  Susanville;  Marsden  Manson  to  Mr.  H.  D.  H.  Connick,  assistant 
engineer,  and  Mr.  F.  F.  S.  Kelsey,  draftsman;  Mr.  J.  M.  Wilson  to  Mr.  Frank  Adams 
and  Mr.  P.  N.  Ashley,  assistants;  C.  E.  Grunsky  to  his  two  field  assistants,  Mr.  E.  F. 
Haas  and  Mr.  F.  C.  Hermann,  and  to  Mr.  J.  C.  Henkenius,  draftsman. 

Acknowledgment  of  courtesies  from  parties  not  directly  employed  in  the  inves- 
tigations are  also  made.  To  the  engineers  and  officers  of  a  number  of  mining  and 
water  companies  on  Yuba  River;  to  the  chamber  of  commerce  and  officials  and 
citizens  of  Yolo,  Lake,  and  Colusa  counties;  to  a  number  of  professors  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  California  and  Leland  Stanford  Junior  University;  to  railroad  companies; 
to  canal  companies,  and  to  many  individuals.  The  large  number  of  persons  who 
have  cooperated  with  these  experts  and  assisted  in  this  work  prevents  a  more  detailed 
acknowledgment  of  courtesies  extended. 

To  the  California  Water  and  Forest  Association  special  acknowledgment  is  due 

5 


6  LETTER    OF    SUBMITTAL. 

because  of  the  financial  aid  received.     The  substantial  character  of  this  assistance  is 
shown  by  the  amounts  of  its  contribution,  as  given  in  the  following  summary: 

Kings  River - $1,125.00 

San  Joaquin  River 1>  125. 00 

Salinas  River 375. 00 

YubaRiver 375.00 

Honey  Lake  Basin 375. 00 

Cache  Creek 625.00 

Maps,  reports,  eta 625. 00 

In  addition  to  the  above,  individuals  and  local  associations  have  contributed 
$250  toward  the  expenses  of  work  on  Stoney  Creek,  now  being  curried  on  by  the 
Department  of  Agriculture,  but  not  included  in  this  report.  The  work  in  .southern 
California  was  paid  for  entirely  by  the  Department.  This  included  the  reports  of 
Messrs.  Schuyler  and  Hoggs,  and  studies  of  the  duty  of  water  carried  on  by  Mr. 
Irving  to  be  published  in  a  later  bulletin. 

Acknowledgment  is  also  due  to  Mr.  R.  P.  Teele,  editor  of  this  office,  for  assist- 
ance in  editing  these  reports  and  preparing  them  for  publication,  and  to  Mr.  C.  E. 
Tait,  draftsman. 

Respectfully,  ELWOOD  MEAD, 

Irrigation  Expert  in  Charge 

Dr.  A.  C.  TRUE,  Director. 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

THE  AGRICULTURAL  SITUATION  IK  CALIFORNIA.     By  KLWOOD  MEAD _. 17 

Introduction 17 

Reform  of  water  laws  a  State  matter 20 

The  scope  and  purpose  of  this  investigation 20 

Duty  of  investigators 21 

Plan  of  the  work 22 

Reasons  for  restricting  discussion  of  water-right  problems  to  irrigation 24 

The  present  and  future  of  irrigation  in  California 25 

Irrigation  in  southern  California 25 

Irrigation  in  northern  California 26 

Diversified  farming  under  irrigation '. 28 

California,  Egypt,  and  Italy  compared 29 

Obstacles  to  development 29 

California  and  Utah  compared 31 

Op|K)sition  to  irrigation 31 

The  desire  for  large  enterprises 32 

Controversies  over  district  enterprises , 33 

Obstacles  presented  by  inadequate  water  laws 34 

Appropriations  for  sale,  rental,  or  distribution 38 

Riparian  rights _ 42 

Legislation  respecting  riparian  rights  in  English  colonies 49 

Canada 49 

Province  of  Victoria,  Australia 51 

Province  of  New  South  Wales,  Australia 52 

Need  of  adequate  State  control  of  streams 53 

The  need  of  a  special  tribunal  to  settle  existing  rights 58 

Abstract  of  litigation  over  rights  to  Kings  River 58 

Attorneys  and  courts  not  responsible 62 

The  nature  of  rights  to  water 63 

Should  appropriations  be  made  perpetual  or  be  limited,  like  franchises,  to  a  number 

of  years 64 

Concluding  suggestions 65 

Jurisdiction  of  special  tribunal 65 

The  importance  of  adequate  preliminary  surveys  and  investigations 66 

The  favoring  conditions  for  these  adjudications  66 

The  protection  of  rights  to  water 67 

The  acquirement  of  rights  hereafter 67 

Navigation  rights  on  Sacramento  end  San  Joaquin  rivers 68 

Term  of  office i .  69 

7 


8  CONTENTS. 

Page. 

TllE    IRRIGATION"    PROBLEMS    OF    HoXEY    LAKE    BASIN,    CAL.       By    WlLLIAM    K.    SMYTHS 71 

Introductory  .' 71 

History  and  resources 71 

Description  of  the  country 72 

Climate  and  products 72 

Surrounding  resources 73 

A  variety  of  problems 73 

The  water  supply  of  Honey  Lake  Basin 74 

Honey  Lake  serves  to  measure  the  supply 75 

Character  of  watershed 76 

Storage  sites 77 

Eagle  Lake 78 

Recent  water  measurements 80 

Appropriation  and  distribution  of  water 80 

The  law  of  appropriation  at  work 83 

Claims  on  Susan  River 84 

Claims  to  Willow  Creek 85 

Balls  Canyon  claims 86 

Claims  to  Long  Valley  Creek 86 

The  Lake  district 87 

Claims  to  waters  of  Eagle  Lake 87 

Recapitulation  and  review 88 

The  duty  of  water 89 

The  distribution  of  water 90 

Litigation 91 

The  Susan  River  communities 92 

Cause  and  character  of  lawsuits 94 

The  "Big  water  suit" 95 

Some  bewildering  decisions 96 

The  stipulation  as  to  storage 98 

The  building  of  the  "Colony  Dam " II!) 

Merits  and  lessons  of  the  controversy 100 

Contracts  of  irrigation  companies 102 

The  needed  reform  of  California  laws 103 

Private  or  public  ownership  of  water 105 

The  larger  irrigation  problem  of  the  basin 107 

The  failure  of  past  enterprises 107 

The  water-right  system 108 

The  cooperative  canal 109 

Possibilities  of  the  Carey  law 109 

State  and  national  works -i 110 

Hope  in  the  district  system 110 

Conclusions Ill 

FEATURES  AND  WATER  RIGHTS  OF  YUBA  RIVER,  CAL.     By  MARSDEN  HANSON 115 

Watershed  of  Yuba  River 115 

Physical  features  and  geology 116 

Nature,  origin,  and  acquisition  of  water  rights  in  the  basin  of  Yuba  River 118 

Claims  filed  on  Yuba  River  and  its  tributaries 121 

Storage  of  water  in  the  basin  of  Yuba  River 121 

Artificial  storage  facilities  on  Yuba  River 123 

South  Fork 123 

Middle  Yuba 125 

North  Yuba 125 


CONTENTS.  9 

FEATURES  AND  WATKII  KICMTS  OK  Yrn.\   KIVKK,   CAL.—  Continued.  Page. 
Storage  of  water  in  the  basin  of  Yulm  River — Continued. 

Forest  storage 126 

Development  of  power  on  Yuba  River 127 

Opinions  upon  points  .submitted  in  circular  letter 128 

Appendix 130 

The  use  of  the  water  of  Yuba  River.     By  H.  D.  H.  Connick 130 

Browns  Valley  irrigation  district 131 

Practice  of  irrigation 132 

]  )uty  of  water 132 

I rrigation  of  alfalfa 132 

Irrigation  of  orchards 133 

Irrigation  of  hay  and  grain 133 

Irrigation  of  corn  and  strawberries 134 

Methods  used  by  Sam  Sing  Company 134 

Loss  by  seepage  and  evaporation 134 

Loss  by  unskillful  irrigation  and  insufficient  preparation  of  land 134 

Measurement 134 

Season  of  irrigation 135 

Soil 135 

Effect  of  irrigation  on  soil 135 

Effect  on  health 135 

Value  of  land 135 

Method  of  distributing  the  water 136 

Duty  of  water  around  Auburn 136 

Cost  of  raising  olives  and  peaches 137 

Value  of  produce 138 

Cost  of  raising  peaches 138 

Principal  ditches  and  reservoirs  in  the  basin  of  Yuba  River 139 

South  Yuba  Water  Company 139 

The  South  Yuba  Canal  system 140 

The  sale  of  water 141 

Value  of  the  property 142 

Summit  Water  and  Irrigation  Company 142 

Kate  Hayes  Company ^ 144 

North  Bloomfield  Gravel  and  Mining  Company 145 

Irrigation  147 

Marysville  and  Nevada  Power  Company 147 

Canals 147 

Reservoirs 148 

Excelsior  Water  and  Mining  Company 148 

Rough  and  Ready  Ditch 149 

New  Town  Diteh  149 

Woods  Ravine  Ditch 149 

Pleasant  Valley  Ditch : 150 

Ousley  Bar  Diteh 150 

Farm  Diteh 150 

Spenceville  Diteh 150 

Dams 151 

Reservoirs 151 

Rights  in  Deer  Creek 151 

Water  rights  in  South  Yuba 152 

New  Blue  Point  Mining  Company's  ditch 152 

Power  stations  in  the  basin  of  Yuba  River 153 


10  CONTENTS. 

Page. 

IRRIGATION  INVESTIGATIONS  ox  CACHE  CREEK.     By  J.  M.  WILSON 

Introduction  

Cache  Creek 

Storage 

Power  possibilities  of  Cache  Creek 160 

Soil 

Wheat  growing 

Appropriation  laws  of  California 

Irrigation  from  Cache  Creek 1  "1 

History  of  other  attempted  appropriations  and  consequent  litigation 

Pumping  plants 

Duty  of  water 

Present  conditions  and  possibilities  of  Yolo  County 

Definitions  of  titles  to  water 

REPORT  ON  IRRIGATION  PROBLEMS  IN  THE  SALINAS  VALLEY.     By  CHARLES  D.  MARX.. 

Irrigation  problems  in  the  Salinas  Valley - 

Claims  to  the  waters  of  Salinas  River  and  its  tributaries 195 

Storage -. 

Use  of  underground  waters 198 

Duty  of  water 199 

Methods  of  distribution 199 

Irrigation  in  Salinas  Valley 201 

Cases  on  irrigation  and  water  rights  arising  in  the  counties  of  Monterey,  San  Benito,  and 

San  Luis  Obispo,  decided  by  the  California  supreme  court 204 

Zimmler  v.  San  Luis  Water  Company 204 

Green  v.  Carotta 204 

Burrows  »'.  Burrows 205 

Smith  ?>.  Corbit 205 

San  Luis  Water  Company  v.  Estrada 206 

Summary 208 

Appendix .  208 

Water-bearing  gravels  and  formations  tributary  to  the  underground  water  supply  of 

the  Salinas  Valley  in  Monterey  County.     By  Edward  H.  Nutter 208 

Conclusions 212 

IRRIGATION  FROM  THE  SAN  JOAQUIN  RIVER.     By  FRANK  SOUI.E 215 

Introduction 215 

A  brief  history  of  the  development  of  irrigation  in  California  and  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley.  216 

Physical  features  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley 218 

The  San  Joaquin  River 218 

The  soils  in  the  drainage  area  of  San  Joaquin  River 220 

Rainfall.. 222 

Flow  of  the  river 222 

Climate 222 

Products 223 

Irrigated  tracts  in  the  valley  and  possible  extensions 223 

Fresno  River 225 

Chowchilla  Creek 226 

Estimate  of  total  area  of  land  which  might  be  irrigated  from  San  Joaquin  and  Fresno  rivers 

and  Chowchilla  Creek 226 

Appropriation  and  distribution  of  water 228 

Summary i 232 

Evolution  of  water  laws  in  California 234 

Statutory  laws  relating  to  water  rights 235 

Rights  of  riparian  proprietors 235 


CONTENTS.  1 1 

IRRIGATION  FKOM  THE  KAN  JOAQIMN  KIVKK — Continued.  PaKC 
Evolution  of  water  laws  in  California — Continued. 

The  Wright  district  law 236 

Litigation  over  water  rights  on  San  Joaquin  and  Fresno  rivers  and  Chowchilla  Creek 237 

In  the  superior  court  of  Fresno  County 237 

In  the  superior  court  of  Madera  County 242 

In  the  superior  court  of  Merced  County 24") 

In  the  superii >r  <•< mrt  of  Mariposa  County 245 

Invest i-iat ions  in  the  field • 246 

Canals  on  San  Joaquin  River 246 

Upper  San  .loaijiiin  River  Canal  Company 246 

'I'he  Alls. .  ( 'anal ; 247 

The  Chowchilla  Canal 247 

The  Blyth  Canal 247 

The  Fast  Side  ('anal -  247 

The  .lames  ( 'anal 248 

The  irrigation  system  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation 

Company 248 

Canals  on  Fresno  River 249 

Canals  on  Chowchilla  Creek 250 

Sierra  Vista  Vineyard  Company 250 

Bliss  Canal 250 

Distribution  of  water  among  canals 250 

Distribution  of  water  among  irrigators 252 

Met  bods  of  irrigating 253 

Duty  of  water 254 

Answers  to  a  circular  letter  of  inquiry  concerning  irrigation  matters 254 

Conclusions 255 

Methods  of  filing  and  recording  claims  to  water 255 

Adjudication  of  water  rights 256 

Influence  of  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  on  the  success  of  irrigation 256 

Stream  control 257 

State  engineer 257 

Where  claims  should  be  recorded 257 

Conservation  and  use  of  flood  waters,  and  legislation  thereon 257 

WATER  APPROPRIATIONS  FROM  KINGS  RIVER.     By  C.  E.  GRUNSKY 259 

Kings  River 259 

Watershed 260 

Valley  section  of  Kings  River 261 

Lands  irrigated : • 262 

TulareLake 265 

Rainfall  and  climate 266 

The  flow  of  Kings  River 267 

Water  storage t 269 

Claims  to  water 269 

Insufficiency  of  the  record , 270 

Water  laws  and  water  rights 272 

Water-right  litigation 276 

Kings  River  canals 282 

San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal 282 

Sanger  Flume 283 

Ditches  of  Centerville  Bottoms 283 

Rice  Ditch 284 

Jacobie  Ditch 284 

The  Dunnigan-Byrd  Ditch 284 


12  CONTENTS. 

WATER  APPROPRIATIONS  FROM  KINGS  RIVER — Continued.  Page. 
Kings  River  canals — Continued. 

Ditches  of  Centerville  Bottoms — Continued. 

Hanke  Ditch 284 

Cameron  Ditch 284 

Dennis  Ditch 284 

Byrd  Ditch 285 

The  New  Jack  Ditch 285 

Mitchell  Ditch 285 

Fink  Channel 285 

Jack  Ditch 285 

Fink  Ditch 286 

Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal 286 

FresnoCanal 286 

Centerville  Ditch 289 

Sweem  Ditch 290 

Fowler  Switch  Canal 290 

Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal 291 

Alta  Irrigation  District 293 

Selma  Irrigation  District 296 

Sunset  Irrigation  District 296 

Carmelita  Ditch 297 

Peoples  Ditch 297 

Mussel  Slough  Ditch 299 

Last  Chance  Ditch 300 

Leinberger  Slough 301 

Lower  Kings  River  Canal 302 

Rhoads  Canal 304 

Tulare  Lake  Bed  canals 3(14 

Kings  Canal 304 

West  Side  Canal 304 

Clausen  &  Blakeley  Canal 304 

Lovelace  Canal 304 

Emigrant  Ditch 305 

Liberty  Canal :;o"> 

Murphy  Slough  Association 306 

Millrace  Canal 306 

Turner  Ditch '. 306 

Reed  Ditch 306 

Riverdale  Ditch-. 307 

Burrell  Ditch 307 

Roundtree  Ditch 308 

Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  canals 308 

Crescent  Canal 310 

Stimson  Canal 311 

Calamity  Ditch 312 

Hite  Ditch 312 

James  East  Side  Canal 312 

James  West  Side  Canal '. 312 

Pump  irrigation  from  Fresno  Slough 313 

Whiteside  Pump 313 

MitchlerPump 313 

The  Lee  Pump 313 

Borland  Pump 314 

Methods  and  practice  of  irrigation 314 


CONTENTS.  13 

WATER    APPROPRIATIONS    FROM    KlNGS    RlVEIi — Continued.  Page. 

The  present  situation 317 

N i 'i'il  of  a  department  for  water  control  and  investigation 321 

Conclusions 322 

Appendix 323 

Kvaporation  experiments  on  Kings  River 323 

A    STUDY    OK    WATKK    KKiHTS   O.N    THE    I, OS    AxiiELES    RlVER,   CAL.       By  EDWARD    M.   BoGGS 327 

I  Hscovery  and  colonization 327 

Irrigation  in  the  pueblo 328 

Los  Angeles  River 329 

Claims  to  water  on  Los  Angeles  River 330 

Laws  of  appropriation 332 

Litigation 335 

Loa  Angeles  Water  Company  r.  Los  Angeles  City 337 

Felix  c.  City  of  Los  Angeles 337 

Elms  r.  City  of  Los  Angeles 339 

Vernon  Irrigation  Company  v.  City  of  Los  Angeles 339 

City  of  Los  Angeles  r.  Pomery  et  al 340 

The  City  of  Los  Angeles  v.  West  Los  Angeles  Water  Company 342 

Distribution  and  use  of  water 343 

Conclusions 346 

I  "resent  water  law  derived  from  mining  law 347 

I  mproved  system  of  making  appropriations  needed 347 

Water  rights  should  attach  to  the  land 348 

Wasteful  practice  should  not  be  permitted 348 

Recommendations 349 

Remarks  on  the  foregoing  recommendations ., 350 

PROHLEMS  OF  WATER  STORAGE  ox  TORRENTIAL  STREAMS  OF  SOUTHERN  CALIFORNIA  AS  TYPIFIED  BY 

SWEETWATER   AND   SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.       By   JAMES    D.    SCHUYLER 353 

Introduction 353 

Sweetwater  River 354 

Physical  characteristics 354 

The  duty  of  the  stream 356 

( 'laims  to  the  water  of  Sweetwater  River 359 

Difficulty  of  finding  claims  to  water  in  records 367 

Unrecorded  water  rights 367 

The  duplication  of  the  Sweetwater  Dam  water  supply  by  subterranean  water  developments.  369 

Riparian  rights 374 

Rights  to  water  for  mining,  power,  and  domestic  uses 377 

The  methods  by  which  the  amount  and  character  of  water  rights  are  determined 377 

Primary  rights 377 

Secondary  rights 378 

Litigation  over  water  rights,  its  causes,  cost,  and  influence  on  irrigation  development,  and 

the  principles  established  by  the  decisions  rendered 379 

The  National  City  water-rate  case 379 

Water-rate  case  of  Lanning  v.  Osborne  et  al 380 

Appeal  from  ordinance  of  supervisors  fixing  rates 382 

The  National  City  case,  establishing  that  domestic  use  is  not  superior  to  irrigation 382 

The  Sharpe  case 382 

The  Hale  water-right  case 383 

Cost  of  water  litigation v 384 

Rights  for  storage  and  underground  waters 384 

Nature  of  an  appropriation  of  water 384 

Return  seepage  and  its  effect  on  water  rights 384 

Methods  of  distribution  and  duty  of  water 385 


14  CONTENTS. 

PROBLEMS  OF  WATER  STORAGE  ON  TORRENTIAL  STREAMS  OF  SOUTHERN  CALIFORNIA,  ETC. — Continued. 

Methods  of  distribution  and  duty  of  water — Continued.  Page. 

Water-right  contracts,  water  rates,  etc 385 

The  fixing  of  water  rates 388 

Hemet  Creek 389 

Claims  to  water  on  Hemet  Creek 300 

The  Hemet  Dam 391 

The  irrigated  lands 392 

Water-right  contracts 392 

General  conclusions 392 

RECOMMENDATIONS  OK  SPECIAL  AGENTS  AND  EXPERTS 397 

Board  of  control 397 

State  hydraulic  engineer 398 

Unappropriated  waters  declared  public  property 398 

Limitation  on  rights 398 

Domestic  use  to  be  a  preferred  right 398 

All  rights  to  be  based  on  use 398 

Board  of  control  to  fix  water  rights 398 

Right  of  eminent  domain 399 

Governor  to  appoint  a  commission  to  frame  laws '. 399 

State  aid  to  districts 399 

National  aid 399 

Cooperation  of  State  and  National  governments  with  especial  reference  to  Sacramento  and 

San  Joaquin  rivers 399 

Forest  management 400 

National  aid  for  private  land  discouraged 400 

Reclamation  of  public  lands 400 

INDEX  . .  401 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


PLATES. 

Page. 

PLATE    I.  Relief  map  of  California Frontispiece 

II.  A  typical  irrigation  scene — Branch  of  Fresno  Canal 18 

I 1 1.  Irrigation  scenes  in  California 24 

I V.  Agricultural  scenes  in  California 28 

V.   1  lorticultnral  scenes  in  California 28 

VI.   Map  of  California  showing  area  included  in  the  investigations 32 

VII.  Map  of  Susan  River 92 

VIII.  Map  of  Yuba  River 116 

IX.  Irrigation  works,  Upper  Yuba  River 124 

X.  In  the  valley  of  Yuba  River 130 

XI.  Map  of  Cache  Creek 156 

XII.  Section  of  Drake's  relief  map  showing  Clear  Lake  and  Cache  Creek  district 156 

XIII.  Clear  Lake  and  Cache  Creek 158 

X I V.  Diagram  showing  precipitation  in  Clear  Lake  drainage  basin 160 

X  V.   Views  along  Moore  Ditch 174 

XVI.  Irrigation  works  abandoned  as  result  of  litigation 180 

XVII.  Pumping  plants  along  Cache  Creek 182 

XVIII.  Orchard  scenes  along  Cache  Creek 188 

XIX.  Irrigation  scenes  along  the  Salinas  River 202 

XX.  Irrigation  scenes  along  the  Salinas  River 202 

XXI.  Irrigation  scenes  along  the  San  Joaquin  River 246 

XXII.  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal 246 

XXIII.  Canal  scenes 246 

XXIV.  Map  of  Kings  River 260 

XXV.  Scenes  on  canals  along  Kings  River 282 

XXVI.  Scenes  on  canals  along  Kings  River 292 

XXVII.  Cobble  and  brush  dam  in  Kings  River ( 314 

XXVIII.  Map  of  Sweetwater  River 354 

XXIX.  Typical  scenes  in  southern  California 356 

TEXT  FIGURES. 

FIG.    1.  Diagram  showing  variation  in  precipitation  with  altitude .., 122 

2.  Diagram  showing  depth  of  snow  at  Lake  Fordyce 123 

3.  Diagram  showing  successive  use  of  the  water  of  Yuba  River 127 

4.  Unusual  types  of  dams  in  Yuba  River 139 

5.  Conventional  signs  used  in  illustrating  report  on  Salinas  River 208 

6.  Outcrop  of  beds  in  Salinas  Valley 209 

7.  Sand  and  shale  beds  in  oil  well 210 

8.  Slope  in  railway  cut  near  Bradley 211 

9.  Probable  structure  of  Salinas  Valley  through  Chualar 212 

10.  Probable  structure  of  Salinas  Valley  near  Metz 213 

15 


16  ILLUSTRATIONS. 

Page. 

Fio.  11.  Probable  structure  of  Salinas  Valley  through  San  Lucas 213 

12.  Rainfall  at  San  Francisco,  and  fluctuations  in  depth  of  Tulare  I^ake 265 

13.  A.  Headworks  of  Fresno  and  Fowler  Switch  canals 287 

B.  Headworks  of  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal 287 

14.  A.  Headworks  of  Peoples  Canal 298 

B.  Headworks  of  Last  Chance  and  Leinberger  canals 298 

C.  Headworks  of  Lower  Kings  River  Canal 298 

15.  A.  Lower  Kings  River  Canal 302 

B.  Headworks  of  Emigrant  Canal 302 

C.  Headworks  of  Liberty  Canal 302 

D.  Headworks  of  South  Millrace  Ditch 302 

£.  Head  wprks  of  Turner  Ditch 302 

F.  Headworks  of  Reed  Ditch 302 

16.  A.  Headworks  of  Riverdale  and  Bun-ell  ditches 307 

B.  Headworks  of  Crescent  Canal 307 

C.  Headworks  of  Stimson  Canal 307 


IRRIGATION  INVESTIGATIONS  IN  CALIFORNIA. 


THE  AGRICULTURAL  SITUATION  IN  CALIFORNIA, 

By  ELWOOD  MEAD, 

Irr!f//Hii/it  J-'j-/>rii  in  Charge. 

INTRODUCTION. 

As  an  agricultural  State  California  stands  alone.  No  other  humid  or 
arid  commonwealth  has  as  diversified  products  or  high-priced  farming  land. 
In  some  respects  the  climate  is  marvelous  in  its  possibilities.  The  usual 
limitations  imposed  by  latitude  are  here  set  aside.  Oranges  ripen  as  early 
and  surely  at  Oroville,  100  miles  north  of  San  Francisco,  as  at  San  Diego, 
500  miles  south  of  that  city,  and  much  of  the  State  has  the  unique  distinc- 
tion of  being  able  to  grow  all  the  products  of  New  England  and  of  Florida 
on  the  same  acre  of  land.  Sacramento,  which  has  the  same  latitude  as 
southern  Illinois,  is  surrounded  by  districts  where  blue-grass  lawns  are 
shaded  by  palm  and  orange  trees.  The  summers  are  not  too  hot  for  the 
turf  nor  the  winters  too  cold  for  the  trees.  Nowhere  east  of  the  mountain 
barrier  formed  by  the  Sierras  are  these  products  grown  together.  On  the 
east  side  of  the  range  one  has  to  travel  south  500  miles  to  find  a  palm 
tree,  while  in  Illinois  the  apple  takes  the  place  of  the  orange.  It  is  the 
only  State  where  crops  can  be  harvested  with  absolute  assurance  that  rain 
will  not  fall  to  injure  them,  yet  where  these  crops  can  be  grown  by  the  aid 
of  rainfall  alone.  In  much  of  the  cultivated  portion  of  the  State  irrigation 
is  not  a  matter  of  necessity,  but  of  choice.  If  a  farmer  is  content  to  raise 
wheat,  ditches  may  be  dispensed  with.  If  he  wishes  to  add  alfalfa  and 
oranges,  and  to  beautify  his  surroundings  with  the  perpetual  green  of  a 
lawn,  he  must  provide  an  added  water  supply. 

Although  irrigation  is  not  a  necessity,  it  is  everywhere  olValue,  because 
its  magic  brings  into  full  fruition  all  of  the  attractions  with  which  the  State 
is  so  generously  endowed.  By  its  aid  midsummer  can  be  made  almost  as 
lovely  as  spring.  It  obviates  or  lessens  the  dust  and  discomfort  of  the 
rainless  season  and  makes  it  possible  to  create  rural  homes  which  on  the 
whole  represent  an  average  of  human  comfort  hardly  to  be  equaled  else- 
where in  this  countiy.  It  completes  the  marvelous  combination  which 
23856— No.  100—01 2  17 


18  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

makes  winter  a  season  of  seed  time  instead  of  stagnation;  which  gives  to 
tanners  man}-  of  the  products  of  the  Tropics  with  the  climate  of  the  temperate 
zone;  which  withholds  moisture  in  harvest  time  and  thus  relieves  the  hus- 
bandman of  the  most  serious  vicissitude  of  regions  of  ample  rainfall.  It  is 
an  aggregation  of  advantages  which  those  who  live  elsewhere  find  it  hard 
to  believe  exists,  and  which  the  people  of  the  State  do  not  fully  appreciate. 
The  delay  in  extending  the  watered  area  is  due  to  obstacles  local  in 
character  and  origin  and  not  met  with  in  equal  measure  in  any  other  arid 
State.  In  no  other  State  are  rivers  used  for  both  irrigation  and  navigation. 
The  owners  of  canals  which  divert  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  have  to 
keep  in  mind  the  steamboats  which  ply  on  these  rivers  from  San  Francisco 
to  Stockton  and  Red  Bluffs.  There  are  many  miles  of  pipe  lines  in  the 
Sierras  which  bear  witness  of  an  interrupted  but  not  abandoned  application 
of  water  in  placer  mining  and  which  represent  rights  to  streams  which  seem 
to  grow  more  numerous  and  valuable  with  age  and  disuse.  The  recent 
improvements  in  transmitting  power  by  electricity  have  enormously  enhanced 
the  utility  of  California  streams  for  the  generation  of  power.  It  used  to  be 
that  the  factory  had  to  go  to  the  stream;  now  the  stream  is  carried  to  the 
factory,  even  when  far  removed.  The  power  of  Tuolunme  River  is  being 
carried  1  GO  miles  to  San  Francisco,  and  this  enterprise  is  only  the  forerunner 
of  a  development  which  will  not  cease  until  the  latent  force  of  the  cascades 
in  every  mountain  canyon  has  been  harnessed  in  one  way  or  another  to  the 
wheels  of  California's  industries.  When  to  these  various  interests  we  add 
the  needs  of  irrigation,  the  management  and  control  of  the  water  supply 
assumes  an  overshadowing  importance.  No  other  element  outside  of  land 
is  of  such  general  and  primary  necessity  or  is  destined  to  exert  an  equal 
influence  on  the  growth  of  the  State  in  wealth  and  population.  The  problem 
before  the  people  of  the  State  is  to  adjust  the  diverse  and  conflicting  interests 
of  navigation,  mining,  power,  and  irrigation;  to  provide  a  just  and  stable 
basis  for  titles  to  water  in  order  to  create  an  industrial  civilization  suited  to 
the  climatic  and  economic  needs  of  a  State  where  water  and  land  are  both 
important. 

The  history  of  irrigation  in  California,  from  the  time  when  the  mission 
fathers  first  turned  its  streams  on  the  thirsty  soil,  has  shown  an  unusual 
mingling  of  romance  and  selfishness.  Men  have  worked  with  each  other 
and  for  each  other  in  cooperative  ditch  enterprises,  many  of  which  have 
been  remarkably  successful,  while  on  the  other  hand  the)-  have  sought  to 
place  their  neighbors  in  bondage  by  spec-illative  appropriations  of  streams. 
Along  with  remarkable  ability  shown  by  engineers  and  irrigators  in 
diverting  and  using  rivers  has  gone  controversy  over  water  rights  in  the 


J.  S    D.'pt   of  Agr..  Bui    100,  Office  of  Expt    Stations       Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  II. 


en 
o 


o 


INTKomVTION.  19 

courts  Mini  firmed  raids  to  destroy  headgatea  or  interfere  with  the  use  of 
canals.  Ability  and  success  in  material  development  have  been  rendered 
futile  by  marked  failure  in  legislation.  Some  of  the  best  examples  of 
ditch  construction  to  be  found  in  this  country  are  in  California,  but  the 
operation  of  these  works  is  embarrassed  by  legislation  which  violates  every 
principle  necessary  to  enduring  success. 

The  present  situation  is  the  natural  outcome  of  this  combination  of 
favorable  and  adverse  conditions.  Although  irrigated  land  in  California 
has  a  greater  value  than  in  any  other  arid  State,  the  watered  area  is  as  yet 
insignificant  when  compared  to  what  is  possible,  and  the  rate  of  extension  is 
slow.  While  water  rents  for  a  higher  price  than  elsewhere,  more  runs  to 
waste  than  is  used.  There  are  few  places  in  the  world  where  rural  life  lias 
the  attractions  or  possibilities  which  go  with  the  irrigated  home  in 
California,  yet  immigration  is  almost  at  a  standstill  and  population  in  some 
of  the  farmed  districts  has  decreased  in  the  past  ten  years.  It  is  certain 
that  some  potent  but  not  natural  cause  is  responsible  for  this,  and  this  cause 
see.ins  to  be  a  lack  of  certainty  or  stability  in  water  rights  which  has  given 
an  added  hazard  to  ditch  building  and  been  a  prolific  source  of  litigation 
and  neighborhood  ill  feeling.  Farmers  who  desire  to  avoid  the  courts  and 
live  on  terms  of  peace  and  concord  with  their  neighbors  avoid  districts 
where  these  conditions  prevail.  Heiice  the  obstacle  to  California's  growth 
seems  to  have  been  unfavorable  social  conditions,  rather  than  lack  of 
natural  opportunities. 

There  is  a  widespread  feeling  that  the  time  lias  come  to  improve  this 
situation.  The  call  for  the  convention  which  gave  the  first  impulse  to  this 
investigation  was  due  to  the  promptings  of  an  awakened  public  spirit, 
seeking  not  solely  the  larger  use  of  the  State's  resources,  but  the  creation 
of  better  social  and  industrial  conditions.  It  is  hoped  that  the  facts 
herein  presented  will  at  least  show  the  need  of  action.  They  ought  to 
do  more;  they  ought  to  lead  to  such  changes  in  laws  and  methods  as 
will  define  and  make  stable  all  existing  rights  and  protect  those  rights 
when  defined  as  far  as  human  agencies  can  accomplish  this  result. 

The  reports  which  follow  give  the  results  of  the  most  comprehensive 
study  yet  made  in  this  country  of  the  social,  legal,  and  economic  problems 
created  bv  the  use  of  streams  to  reclaim  arid  lands.  It  lias  been  carried 
out  under  the  direction  of  the  Office  of  Experiment  Stations  of  the  U.  S. 
Department  of  Agriculture,  but  its  effectiveness  has  been  greatly  increased 
by  the  financial  aid  extended  by  the  Water  and  Forest  Association  and 
other  local  associations  of  the  State.  The  appropriations  for  these  studies 
made  bv  Congress  and  the  contributions  of  money  and  time  by  the 


20  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

public-spirited  citizens  of  California  indicate  a  growing  recognition  of  the 
fact  that  irrigation  is  more  than  a  matter  of  ditches  and  acres.  It  is 
beginning  to  be  realized  that  the  arid  West  has  some  problems  which  are 
new  to  the  people  of  this  country;  that  there  is  being  laid  in  the  West  the 
foundation  of  an  industrial  civilization  different  from  that  of  the  East  and 
capable  of  better  results,  if  wise  laws  and  just  policies  shall  prevail.  It  is  a 
civilization  which  requires  that  every  farmer  shall  be  a  thinker  as  well 
as  a  worker,  and  in  which  the  value  of  the  home  depends  more  on 
institutions  than  on  either  a  fertile  soil  or  ample  water  supply.  No  State 
illustrates  these  truths  more  clearly  than  California.  It  is  the  most  instruc- 
tive field  for  the  prosecution  of  these  investigations  in  the  United  States, 
because  in  no  other  State  have  water  and  land  so  great  a  value,  and  because 
in  no  other  State  are  the  evils  and  abuses  of  imperfect  and  inadequate 
legislation  so  clearly  manifest. 

REFORM  OF  WATER  LAWS  A  STATE  MATTER. 

An  impression  seems  to  prevail  in  the  minds  of  some  of  those  interested 
that  this  investigation  is  destined  to  result  in  a  national  law  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  water  rights  which  would  overtuni  or  unsettle  all  existing  ones. 
This,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  conclusions  of  the  special  agents  in  charge, 
is  not  regarded  as  either  possible  or  desirable,  and  it  is  certainly  not  the 
present  or  ulterior  purpose  of  anyone  connected  with  the  irrigation  investi- 
gations of  the  Department  of  Agriculture.  Rights  to  water  are  based  on 
State  laws  or  State  customs.  There  is  no  reason  to  believe  they  will  be 
overturned  except  with  the  sanction  of  those  most  concerned,  and  when 
there  is  a  desire  for  reform  or  change  no  legislative  agency  can  respond 
so  quickly  and  effectively  as  that  'of  the  State.  The  object  of  this  investi- 
gation, and  more  broadly  of  the  kindred  ones  carried  on  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  is  to  furnish  the  facts  needed  as  a  basis  for  correct 
conclusions  and  safe  legislation. 

Since,  therefore,  the  power  to  act  and  responsibility  for  action  rests 
with  those  directly  concerned,  and  since  action  will  not  follow  the  recom- 
mendations of  this  report  unless  they  commend  themselves  as  just  and 
timely,  those  connected  with  this  investigation  have  felt  that  the  greatest 
service  they  could  render  would  be  to  state  their  views  candidly  as  they 
have  gathered  and  presented  the  facts  impartially. 

THE  SCOPE  AND  PURPOSE  OF  THIS  INVESTIGATION. 

The  investigation  has  been  carried  on  by  eight  students  of  irrigation  of 
wide  experience  and  recognized  ability,  each  of  whom,  with  his  assistants, 
has  gathered  the  available  facts  relative  to  the  character,  number,  and  value 


SCOPE    AND    PURPOSE    OF    INVESTIGATION.  21 

of  water  rights  on  the  stream  or  streams,  and  the  methods  employed  in  the 
distribution  and  use  of  the  water  supply  included  within  his  particular  field. 
To  obtain  these  facts  they  searched  through  many  thousand  pages  of 
miscellaneous  records  to  find  out  how  much  water  was  claimed,  and  the  pur- 
poses for  which  it  was  claimed;  they  overhauled  the  court  dockets  to  learn 
what  litigation  had  determined  regarding  the  nature  of  rights  to  water  and 
the  awards  decreed  to  the  different  appropriators.  Their  field  investigations 
included  measurements  of  the  flow  of  streams,  size  and  location  of  ditches, 
and  the  areas  of  land  irrigated,  so  that  their  reports  show  the  aotual  use  of 
water  by  farmers,  and  over  against  it  the  decreed  and  claimed  volumes  of 
appropriations.  Taken  together  these  reports  present  the  irrigation  situa- 
tion in  California  in  a  concrete  form.  While  the  lessons  drawn  are  based 
on  researches  in  restricted  areas,  they  apply  with  equal  force  to  the  entire 
State,  because  the  streams  studied  are  typical  ones.  Nor  are  these  reports 
of  value  to  California  alone.  The  principles  which  should  govern  the  owner- 
ship and  distribution  of  rivers  are  universal  in  their  application,  and  the 
experience  of  irrigators  in  the  San  Joaquin  and  Sacramento  valleys  is  not 
unlike  that  of  irrigators  in  other  States  where  similar  conditions  prevail. 

DUTY  OF  INVESTIGATORS. 

The  situation  demands  that  those  in  charge  of  these  studies  should  be 
more  than  reporters.  It  is  their  province  to  interpret  the  facts  gathered  and 
state  fearlessly  the  views  held  011  each  important  issue  involved.  It  is  not 
expected  that  their  opinions  or  the  measures  recommended  for  adoption  will 
be  approved  by  all.  For  a  half  century  development  has  gone  on  without 
direction  or  public  control.  Every  appropriator  of  water  has  been  left  free 
to  claim  what  he  pleased,  and  as  a  result  there  are  about  as  many  views 
regarding  the  nature  of  a  water  right  as  there  are  users  of  the  water.  Enter- 
prises have  been  organized  on  conflicting  theories,  so  that  it  is  now  impossi- 
ble to  secure  any  adjustment  which  will  not  affect  some  one  injuriously. 
This  renders  it  all  the  more  important  that  those  who  attempt  to  unravel 
these  complications  should  not  only  study  them  with  open  minds,  but  should 
state  their  conclusions  without  restraint.  This  privilege  will  be  exercised 
in  this  introduction  by  the  writer  in  giving  his  personal  experiences  and 
impressions,  as  well  as  of  presenting  the  conclusions  reached  by  reading  the 
reports  of  his  associates.  Some  of  the  views  herein  expressed  are  known  to 
be  opposed  to  those  of  gentlemen  whose  judgment  is  held  in  high  regard; 
but  no  one  ought  to  object  to  a  candid,  temperate  statement  of  convictions, 
reached  after  much  study  and  expressed  with  a  desire  of  promoting  the 
State's  development. 


22  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

PLAN  OF  THE  WORK. 

The  names  of  the  experts  in  ^charge  of  these  investigations  and  the 
location  of  their  districts  are  given  on  the  map  of  the  State,  on  page  32. 
Their  reports  follow,  in  geographical  order,  beginning  in  the  north  and 
ending  with  the  most  southerly  stream  studied. 

In  order  to  define  the  limits  of  the  inquiry  and  secure  uniformity  in  the 
discussion,  a  letter  of  instruction  was  prepared  which  outlined  the  field  to 
be  covered.  This  letter  was  based  largely  upon  a  petition  of  some  of  the 
representative  citizens  of  California,  addressed  to  Dr.  A.  C.  True,  Director 
of  the  Office  of  Experiment  Stations,  and  as  this  investigation  really 
took  its  form  from  its  statements,  the  petition,  with  an  extract  from  the 
instructions,  are  both  included: 

To  Dr.  A.  C.  TRCE, 

Director,  Office  of  Experiment  Stations,  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture: 

The  undersigned  earnestly  desire  that  Mr.  Klwood  Mead  be  detailed  by  the  Department  to 
conduct  a  series  of  irrigation  investigations  in  California,  and  trust  that  you  may  feel  justified  in 
forwarding  this  request  to  the  honorable  Secretary  of  Agriculture  with  your  approval.  We  have,  of 
course,  ascertained  that  the  proposed  detail  will  not  be  contrary  to  Mr.  Mead's  inclination  or  his 
judgment. 

We  respectfully  submit  that  nowhere  in  America  are  there  irrigation  problems  more  important, 
more  intricate,  or  more  pressing  than  in  California.  Neither  are  there  any  whose  study  would  be 
more  greatly  instructive.  We  can  offer,  we  presume,  examples  of  every  form  of  evil  which  can  be 
found  in  Anglo-Saxon  dealings  with  water  in  arid  and  semiarid  districts.  Great  sums  have  been  lost 
in  irrigation  enterprises.  Still  greater  sums  are  endangered.  Water  titles  are  uiuvrhiin.  The  litigation 
is  appalling. 

Among  the  things  necessary  to  be  known  before  we  can  hope  for  well-considered  legislation 
upon  the  conservation  and  distribution  of  our  waters  are  the  following: 

First.  The  amount  of  water  in  the  streams. 

Second.  The  duty  of  water  in  the  different  irrigation  basins. 

Third.  The  claims  upon  the  water,  collated  by  streams  and  not  by  counties  as  now. 

Fourth.  The  nature  of  water-right  titles. 

Fifth.  The  adjudicated  claims  upon  the  waters. 

Sixth.  The  lands  now  irrigated  and  susceptible  of  irrigation. 

Seventh.  The  possible  increase  of  water  for  beneficial  use  by  storage  in  each  system. 

Eighth.  The  extent  to  which  the  irrigable  area  can  be  increased  by  better  methods  of  distribution 
and  use.1 

1  Signed  by  K.  J.  Wickson,  acting  director  University  of  California  Experiment  Station;  J.  A. 
Filcher,  manager  State  board  of  trade;  William  Thomas;  David  Starr  Jordan,  president  Leland  Stanford 
Junior  University;  E.  B.  Pond,  president  San  Francisco  Savings  Union;  William  Alvord,  president 
Bank  of  California;  Charles  H.  Gilbert,  vice-president  California  Academy  of  Sciences;  Marsden 
Manson;  T.  A.  Kirkpatrick,  vice-president  P.  C.  M.  M.  D.  Company;  E.  E.  Patten;  Grant  S.  Taggart; 
Frank  Soul6,  professor  of  civil  engineering,  University  of  California;  Julius  Kahn;  Victor  H.  Metcalf; 
German  Savings  and  Loan  Society,  by  B.  A.  Becker,  president;  E.  J.  Le  Breton,  president  French 
Savings  Bank  of  San  Francisco;  California  Safe  Deposit  and  Trust  Company;  W.  E.  Brown,  vice- 
president  Crocker-Wool  worth  National  Bank;  Hibernia  Savings  and  Loan  Society,  by  Robert  J.  Tobin, 
secretary;  M.  H.  de  Young,  San  Francisco  Chronicle;  J.  M.  Gleaves,  president  California  Water  and 
Forest  Society;  David  M.  de  Long,  manager  Nevada  and  Monetta  placer  mines;  K.  H.  Goodwin, 
United  States  deputy  mineralogical  surveyor;  Frank  W.  Smith;  Ernst  A.  Denicke,  president  Germania 
Trust  Company;  C.  E.  Grunsky,  civil  engineer;  George  C.  Perkins;  Andrew  W.  Kiddie,  United  States 
deputy  mineralogical  surveyor. 


SCOPE    AND    PURPOSE    OF    INVESTIGATION.  23 

Instructions  to  special  mjentx  nml  r.i-/«r/x  <»/'  the  !  'niti-il  stnti'n  Department  of  Agriculture,  in  the  investigation* 

relating  to  irriijutinn  in  I 'ulifuriiiii. 

GENTLEMEN:  The  study  of  the  irrigation  laws,  customs,  and  conditions  of  California,  in  which 
your  services  have  been  secured,  is  the  most  comprehensive  investigation  of  these  questions  yet 
undertaken  in  this  country.  This  gives,  to  the  facts  you  are  to  gather  and  the  reports  and  conclusions 
based  thereon  an  exceptional  intrrrst. 

What  you  will  do  in  California  is  being  done  in  other  States,  and  for  the  purpose  of  comparing 
results  it  is  desirable,  as  far  as  may  be,  that  all  these  investigations  shall  pursue  the  same  general  plan, 
discuss  the  same  general  problems,  and  follow  the  same  order  in  their  treatment.  Because  of  this,  and 
because  each  of  you  will  act  independently  in  the  collection  of  data  and  in  formulating  your  conclusions, 
it  is  necessary  that  there  be  a  preliminary  understanding  regarding  both  the  nature  of  the  subjects  to 
be  dealt  with,  and  the  general  form  of  your  reports  thereon.  As  an  aid  to  such  understanding  and 
concert  of  action,  the  following  suggestions  are  submitted: 

PLAN   OF   WORK. 

On  the  stream  and  its  tributaries  embraced  in  your  field  of  investigation  endeavor  to  secure  all 
of  the  facts  showing  the  operation  of  the  present  irrigation  system.  This  to  include: 

First.  Abstracts  of  the  records  of  claims  to  water,  character  of  those  records,  including  the 
number  of  claims,  total  volume  claimed,  place  where  recorded,  and  the  ease  or  difficulty  with  which 
the  validity  of  any  claim  can  be  determined. 

Second.  Rights  to  water  for  other  purposes  than  irrigation,  viz,  mining,  power,  and  domestic  use. 

Third.  The  methods  by  which  the  amount  and  character  of  water  rights  are  determined,  accessi- 
bility, and  completeness  of  the  record  showing  the  nature  of  the  established  rights. 

Fourth.  Character  of  litigation  over  water  rights,  its  cost,  the  causes  therefor,  its  influence  on 
irrigation  development,  and  the  principles  established  by  decisions  rendered  in  cases  arising  on  the 
stream  being  studied. 

Fifth.  Rights  for  storage  and  underground  waters,  how  acquired,  and  how  they  are  affected  by 
rights  to  the  surface  flow  of  streams,  and  how  the  use  of  underground  waters  influences  the  stream's 
discharge. 

Sixth.  Nature  of  an  appropriation  of  water.  Who  is  regarded  as  the  appropriator — the  ditch 
builder,  the  owner  of  the  land  on  which  water  is  used,  or  is  the  land  itself  the  appropriator?  What  is 
the  measure  of  its  amount,  the  size  of  the  claim,  the  capacity  of  the  ditch,  or  the  area  irrigated? 

FIELD   INVESTIGATIONS. 

Seventh.  The  collection  of  the  data  showing  discharge  of  stream,  or  measurement  of  its  discharge 
where  no  such  data  can  be  had.  Study  of  volume  of  return  or  seepage  water  and  its  availability  for 
l>eing  again  diverted,  and  its  influence  on  the  value  of  irrigators'  rights. 

Eighth.  Size,  number,  location,  and  capacity  of  ditches  and  other  distributing  works  established, 
and  the  duty  of  water  obtained. 

Ninth.  Collection  of  data  showing  how  water  is  divided  among  different  ditches  from  the  same 
stream,  how  it  is  distributed  among  users.  Nature  of  water-right  contracts  between  canal  owners  and 
water  users,  including  facts  showing  what  contracts  have  proven  satisfactory,  and  what  ones  have  given 
rise  to  controversy,  with  the  reason  therefor.  Collection  of  information  showing  the  value  of  water  for 
irrigation  as  shown  by  the  rates  paid  for  its  delivery,  the  methods  by  which  these  rates  are  established, 
and  *heir  justice  or  objectionable  features. 

REPORTS. 

Tenth.  While  the  facts  gathered  will  largely  modify  the  nature  of  their  presentation,  it  will  greatly 
aid  those  who  read  your  conclusions  if  they  deal  with  the  same  issues  and  in  the  same  order.  The 
following  scheme  is. suggested: 

(a)  The  foundation  of  any  system  of  administrative  laws  is  the  method  of  establishing  rights  to 
the  stream.  In  your  discussion  of  the  results  in  California,  the  first  question  to  be  considered  is 
whether  or  not  the  present  method  of  filing  and  recording  claims  to  water  is  satisfactory.  If  not,  what 
should  take  its  place? 

(6)  Is  the  present  method  of  adjudicating  rights  satisfactory?    If  not,  what  should  replace  it? 


24  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

(c)  The   present  law  provides  for  the  appropriation  of  water  fur  sale,  rental,  or  distribution. 
Does  it  provide  for  its  direct  appropriation  by  the  user  without  the  intervention  of  the  seller,  renter, 
or  distributor?     Is  there  any  method  by  which  the  owner  of  a  tract  of  land  can  acquire  directly  from 
the  public  a  right  to  the  water  which  reclaims  that  land,  as  he  can  now  obtain  title  to  the  public  land 
itself  by  means  of  the  desert  or  homestead  laws?     If  not,  should  there  be  legislation  to  provide  for  tin*? 

(d)  Is  the  present  system  of  stream  control  or  lack  of  it,  and  the  dividing  of  water  between  the 
different  ditches  which  divert  the  common  supply  satisfactory?     If  not,  what  form  of  administration 
or  control  should  take  its  place? 

(e )  Should  there  be  a  State  engineer;  and  if  so,  what  should  be  his  duties? 

(/)  Should  there  be  a  central  office  of  record  of  claims  or  titles  to  water  in  place  of  the  present 
separate  county  records,  and  what  supervision  or  control  should  be  exercised  over  rights  to  be  acquired 
hereafter? 

(g)  What  steps  should  be  taken  to  secure  the  fullest  conservation  and  use  of  water  which  now  rum, 
to  waste?  The  discussion  of  this  question  to  include  State  or  national  control  and  aid,  the  legislation 
needed  to  define  rights  to  stored  water,  and  to  determine  who  is  entitled  to  the  water  thus  stored. 

It  is  understood  that  this  outline  will  not  touch  all  of  the  complex  and  important  problems  which 
your  investigations  will  disclose  and  with  which  your  reports  will  have  to  deal.'  It  is,  however, 
believed  to  state  some  of  the  leading  ones  with  which  legislators  and  users  of  water  are  now  confronted, 
not  only  in  California,  but  in  every  other  Commonwealth. 

Sincerely  yours,  Ki.woon  MEAD, 

Irrigation  Expert  in  Charge. 

Within  the  limits  thus  fixed  each  of  the  gentlemen  in  charge  of  these 
investigations  has  been  a  law  to  himself.  He  has  gathered  his  facts  and 
stated  his  conclusions  without  advice  or  direction  from  any  source.  This  has 
resulted  in  some  repetitions  which  might  otherwise  have  been  avoided,  but 
this  defect  is  thought  to  be  outweighed  by  the  advantage  gained  from  a 
complete  and  unmodified  statement  of  the  views  of  each  of  these  gentlemen. 

REASONS  FOB  RESTRICTING  DISCUSSION  OF  WATER-RIGHT  PROBLEMS  TO 

IRRIGATION. 

While  this  investigation  deals  primarily  with  the  problems  of  irrigated 
agriculture,  the  fact  is  not  lost  sight  of  that  other  important  industries  have 
a  common  interest  with  irrigation  in  securing  laws  which  will  provide  for 
the  final  establishment  of  titles  to  the  water  used  and  protect  these  titles  in 
time  of  scarcity.  At  present  it  is  notorious  that  anyone  attempting  to 
utilize  the  streams  of  California  for  any  purpose  has  to  add  to  the  ordinary 
or  legitimate  risks  and  expenses  of  his  enterprise  a  large  and  continuing 
outlay  for  litigation  to  maintain  his  right  to  water.  A  reform  which  will 
render  this  needless  will  promote  development  in  other  directions  as  much 
as  in  agriculture.  A  just  system  of  laws  will  take  into  account  the  needs 
of  all  interests.  This  report  is  restricted  to  a  consideration  of  the  rights 
and  needs  of  the  irrigator  because  the  Congressional  appropriation  limits 
the  investigation  to  irrigation,  but  this  must  not  imply  that  other  rights  are 
not  regarded  as  important  or  not  entitled  to  impartial  recognition.  Exactly 
the  reverse  is  true. 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr  ,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE 


PRESENT    AND    FUTURE    OF    IRRIGATION.  25 

THE  PRESENT  AND  FUTURE  OF  IRRIGATION  IN  CALIFORNIA. 

It  is  well  to  understand  at  the  outset  just  what  irrigation  is  doing  for 
California  and  what  it  can  be  made  to  do;  how  much  of  the  State's  pros- 
perity now  comes  from  it  and  to  what  extent  it  will  promote  future  growth. 
In  the  States  wholly  arid  this  is  a  simple  matter,  because  there  is  a  clearly 
drawn  line  which  separates  the  valuable  cultivated  land  from  the  worthless 
desert,  and  the  difference  between  the  two  is  wholly  due  to  irrigation.  In 
much  of  California  this  is  not  the  case.  A  farmer  may  irrigate  his  garden 
and  leave  his  wheat  field  to  the  rain.  The  forest  of  windmills  around 
Stockton  marks  the  region  of  market  gardens;  beyond  these  the  land  is  still 
cultivated,  but  it  is  watered,  if  at  all,  from  the  clouds  and  not  by  irrigation. 
On  the  road  from  Sacramento  to  Folsom  one  passes  a  constant  succession 
of  vineyards  and  orchards,  some  irrigated,  some  not,  yet  both  appear 
flourishing.  In  the  Santa  Clara  Valley  irrigation  did  not  precede  the 
planting  of  orchards,  but  is  now  slowly  being  adopted  as  they  come  into 
full  bearing.  Nevertheless,  no  State  has  gained  more  from  the  use  of  rivers 
in  irrigation  than  California  or  has  more  at  stake  in  the  extension  of  this 
use.  The  following  facts  show  only  in  part  the  reasons  for  this: 

IRRIGATION  IN  SOUTHERN  CALIFORNIA. 

In  order  to  realize  what  irrigation  has  accomplished  in  California  one 
must  go  to  the  southern  part  of  the  State  where  land,  not  worth  85  an  acre 
in  its  original  condition,  has  sold  when  irrigated  and  planted  to  orange  trees 
for  $1,700  an  acre;  where  valleys,  which  were  originally  deserts  or  sand 
and  cactus,  producing  nothing  more  valuable  than  stunted  grass,  and  where 
a  whole  township  would  not  keep  a  settler  and  his  family  from  starving  to 
death  if  compelled  to  cultivate  it  in  its  natural  state,  have  been  transformed 
into  the  highest  priced  and  most  productive  agricultural  lauds  in  this  coun- 
try; where  water,  which  formerly  ran  unused  to  the  ocean,  is  worth  for 
irrigation  alone  10  cents  per  1,000  gallons;  where  $3.50  an  inch,  and  40 
cents  an  inch  extra  for  its  carriage,  was  paid  last  year  for  a  twenty-four 
hours'  flow.  So  valuable  is  water  that  $50,000  was  recently  paid  for  a  per- 
petual rigli^  to  50  inches.  This  was  at  wholesale;  in  small  quantities  it  has 
sold  for  more  inoney.  The  water  used  last  year  in  the  irrigation  of  10 
acres  of  orange  land  cost  more  than  would  be  required  to  purchase  an  equal 
acreage  of  the  best  farming  lands  of  Iowa. 

Before  streams  were  diverted  and  used  by  irrigators  they  had  no 
value,  and  the  land  on  their  margin  had  little.  Since  this  use  began  the 
citrus-fruit  lands  of  southern  California  have  brought  net  annual  returns  of 
$200  to  $450  an  acre,  and  this  year's  crop  will  be  worth  approximately 


26  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


,1  the  whole  making-  a  record  of  increase  in  productive  capacity 
and  a  creation  of  agricultural  wealth  not  surpassed  in  this  or  any  other  country. 
The  rise  in  land  yalues  and  the  value  of  the  crops  grown  are  not, 
However,  the  chief  benefits  which  irrigation  has  conferred  on  southern 
California.  A  far  larger  gain  has  come  from  the  beautiful  landscapes  created 
in  these  deserts  by  the  oases  of  fruit  and  foliage,  which,  with  the  matchless 
healthfulness  and  charm  of  the  climate,  have  made  this  section  the  resort 
of  health  and  pleasure  seekers  from  all  parts  of  the  globe.  The  climate 
alone  would  not  have  accomplished  this.  Limited  trains  on  the  transcon- 
tinental railways  from  the  East  would  not  be  crowded  if  Pasadena  looked 
now  as  it  did  when  first  viewed  by  the  mission  fathers,  and  before  they 
began  at  San  Diego  the  work  which  makes  this  valley  now  so  justly  famous. 
The  cities  of  Los  Angeles,  Redlands,  and  San  Diego  are  just  as  much  cre- 
ations of  irrigation  as  the  orange  groves  which  surround  them.  Whatever 
may  be  true  of  the  remainder  of  the  State  there  is  no  question  that  southern 
California's  present  prosperity  and  its  future  growth  depend  largely  on  the 
distribution  and  use  of  its  water  supply. 

IRRIGATION  IN  NORTHERN  CALIFORNIA. 

Southern  California  has  demonstrated  the  value  of  irrigation.  Northern 
California  illustrates  its  latent  possibilities.  When  one  considers  the  vast 
area  of  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  valleys,  with  a  surface  shaped  by 
nature  for  the  easy  spreading  of  water,  with  a  soil  of  great  fertility  and  a 
marvelous  climate,  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  is  to  be  during  the  twentieth 
century  a  great  field  of  activity,  not  of  the  farmer  alone,  but  the  engineer, 
the  lawyer,  and  the  student  of  social  and  economic  questions. 

The  available  water  supply  of  this  valley  ought  to  make  it  the  Egypt 
of  the  Western  Hemisphere.  A  seven  years'  record  of  the  flow  of  Sacni- 
mento  River,  measured  above  the  confluence  of  this  stream  with  the  San 
Joaquin,-  shows  that  during  that  period  181,553,808  acre-feet  of  water  ran 

1  Letter  from  Frank  Wiggins,  secretary  Los  Angeles  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

2  The  summary  given  below  shows  the  total  discharge  of  Sacramento  River,  at  Collinsville,  for  the 
seven  years  from  1878  to  1885,  inclusive.    ,It  is  taken  from  "Physical  data  and  statistics  of  California," 
Report  of  William  Ham.  Hall,  State  engineer,  1886: 

Flow,  in  acre 

feet. 
1878-79  .................................................................     26,414,302 

1879-80  ......................................................  ;  ..........     32,205,831 

1880-81  .................................................................     31,922,750 

1881-82  .................................................................     25,  503,  305 

1882-83  .................................................................     17,633,585 

1883-84  .................................................................     29,947,038 

1884-85  ...........  .........................................     17,926,997 

Mean  for  the  seven  years  ..........................................     25,  936,  258 


PRESENT    AND    FUTURE    OF    IRRIGATION.  27 

into  San  Francisco  Bay.  The  mean  annual  discharge  for  these  years  was 
nearly  26,000,000  acre-feet.  On  a  duty  of  water  of  2  acre-feet,  per  acre, 
this  would  irrigate  13,000,000  acres.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  if  it  will 
require  2  acre-feet  of  water  to  irrigate  an  acre  of  land  in  Sacramento  Valley. 
As  near  as  can  be  determined,  the  irrigable  area  of  the  valley  is  less  than 
13,000,000  acres — probably  somewhere  between  10,000,000  and  12,000,000 
acres.  Hence  the  water  which  runs  to  waste  from  the  Sacramento  Valley, 
if  it  could  be  made  available,  would  more  than  suffice  to  irrigate  every  acre 
that  can  be  reached  by  canals  from  the  river  or  from  its  tributaries. 

An  effort  was  made  to  secure  the  full  discharge  of  San  Joaquin  River,  but 
without  success.  From  the  records  of  the  gagings  made  on  the  headwaters 
and  on  a  number  of  its  tributaries,  it  seems  probable  that  the  total  flow  of 
this  stream  is  approximately  one-third  that  of  the  Sacramento,  enough 
certainly,  if  conserved  and  economically  used,  to  irrigate  several  million 
acres  of  land.  Not  all  this  water  can  be  used.  A  large  percentage  will 
always  run  to  waste  during  the  winter  months;  but  storage  will  do  much 
to  lessen  this,  a  wise  forest  policy  will  aid,  and  winter  irrigation  will 
supplement  both.  The  first  step,  however,  is  to  use  that  which  now  escapes 
in  the  summer.  The  doing  of  this  lias  hardly  begun.  In  Utah  and  Colo- 
rado a  stream  like  the  Sacramento  running  practically  to  waste  in  August 
\vouldbe  regarded  as  next  to  a  crime.  Even  the  ditches  already  built  to 
divert  its  flow  remain  empty.  This  is  not  because  water  for  irrigation 
lacks  value.  The  yearly  rental  for  water  supplied  by  the  South  Yuba 
Water  Company  is  $45  an  inch.  It  is  evidently  worth  this  much  to  irriga- 
tors,  or  the  price  would  not  be  paid.  How  many  acres  an  inch  will  irrigate 
is  not  known,  as  reports  vary  from  3  to  10  acres.  Assuming  the  average 
to  be  f>  acres,  the  water  thus  used  on  an  acre  is  worth  $9.  The  land 
irrigated  from  the  North  Fork  Ditch,  on  American  River,  is  worth  more 
than  twice  as  much  as  the  adjacent  nonirrigated  land.  The  water  from 
this  canal  rents  for  $4  an  acre  for  citrus  fruits  and  S3  an  acre  for  deciduous 
fruits,  with  an  added  charge  of  Si  an  acre  for  maintaining  the  irrigation 
system.  The  annual  water  rental  for  lands  seeded  to  alfalfa  is  S3  an  acre; 
that  for  small  grain  Si  an  acre,  with,  as  before,  $1  an  acre  added  for 
maintaining  the  canal  and  distributing  works.  The  orange  crop  from  one 
10-acre  tract  in  this  colony  sold  last  year  for  over  $7,000.  There  was 
expended  for  labor  in  its  cultivation  S2,000,  and  the  land  itself  is  valued 
at  $350  an  acre.  Comparing  the  financial  returns,  the  number  of  men 
employed,  the  increased  productiveness  and  value  of  land  where  irrigated, 
with  the  scanty  population,  diminished  fertility,  nonresident  landlordism, 


28  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

and  small  yield  of  wheat  where  irrigation  is  not  practiced,  leaves  no  question 
as  to  what  is  to  be  the  ultimate  use  of  these  rivers.  These  are  not  isolated 
or  exceptional  examples.  Several  others  equally  significant  came  under  my 
personal  notice,  while  one  crop  of  citrus  fruits  brought  the  surprising  sum 
of  $1,800  an  acre. 

DIVERSIFIED  FARMING  UNDER  IRRIGATION. 

One  of  the  needs  of  northern  California  is  more  diversified  farming. 
Rotation  of  crops  is  one  of  the  most  effective  means  of  preserving  the  fer- 
tility of  the  soil.  This  result  is  now  secured  in  fruit  growing  by  the  use 
of  fertilizers,  but  there  is  a  limit  to  the  profitable  extension  of  the  acreage 
devoted  to  fruits.  There  is,  however,  no  limit  to  the  profitable  extension  of 
agriculture,  which  makes  each  home  largely  self-supporting,  where  each 
farmer  grows  nearly  everything  he  consumes,  where  his  farm  supplies  him 
with  his  poultry,  butter,  eggs,  and  meat,  where  he  grows  his  own  hay  and 
has  his  own  pasture  and  his  own  orchard  and  garden.  Every  acre  seeded  to 
alfalfa  is  a  double  gain  to  the  State.  It  stops  the  impoverishment  of  the  soil 
and  is  another  step  toward  making  the  State  wholly  independent  of  the  out- 
side world.  More  than  this,  it  replaces  unprofitable  cultivation  with  a  kind 
which  pays.  How  well  it  pays  was  'shown  by  numerous  reported  yields 
of  11  tons  of  alfalfa  hay  per  acre,  worth  $5  per  ton. 

The  report  of  Professor  Soulc  states  that  water  rates  in  the  San  Joaquin 
Valley  range  from  $2  to  $6  per  acre  where  these  rates  are  fixed  by  super- 
visors, and  are  being  contested.  This,  on  a  duty  of  5  acres  to  the  inch, 
would  mean  a  value  of  810  to  $25  per  inch.  Wasted  water  is  therefore 
wasted  wealth.  The  loss  to  the  State  in  productive  capacity  can  scarcely 
be  measured,  but  the  following  comparisons  with  other  irrigated  countries 
will  show  something  of  its  character. 

Within  a  radius  of  5  miles  in  the  Sacramento  Valley  I  saw  every  product 
of  the  temperate  and  semitropical  zones  which  I  could  call  to  mind.  Apples 
and  oranges  grew  side  by  side,  as  did  oak  and  almond  trees.  There  were 
olives  from  the  South  and  cherries  from  the  North.  A  date  palm  seemed 
equally  at  home  with  an  alfalfa  meadow;  figs  and  tokay  grapes  were  appar- 
ently as  much  in  their  element  as  the  fields  of  wheat  and  barley  or  the  rows 
of  Indian  corn,  some  of  the  stalks  of  which  measured  15  feet  in  height.  All 
of  these  things  could  have  been  grown  on  a  single  acre,  and  doubtless  have 
been.  It  is  a  sinful  waste  of  opportunities  to  continue  using  thousands  of 
acres  of  this  land  to  grow  wheat,  which  steadily  impoverishes  the  soil  and 
robs  the  pockets  of  its  owners.  The  irrigable  lands  of  California  are  no 


(J.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  But.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations       Irrigation  Investigate 


PLATE  IV. 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100.  Office  of  Expt    Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  V. 


OBSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  29 

place  for  bonanza  farms.     They  are  tar  better  suited  to  the  creation  of  10 
and  20  acre  homes. 

CALIFORNIA,  EGYPT,  AND   ITALY   COMPARED. 

There  are  more  acres  of  irrigable  land  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  than  are 
now  watered  in  Egypt  from  the  Nile,  where  agriculture  alone  supports  over 
5,000,000  people,  maintains  a  costly  government,  and  pays  the  interest  on 
a  national  debt  half  as  large  as  that  of  the  United  States.  The  area  which 
can  be  irrigated  from  the  Sacramento  is  about  equal  to  that  irrigated  in 
Italy  from  the  Po.  The  population  of  the  California  Valley  is  about  20 
people  to  the  square  mile.  In  the  Italian  Valley  it  is  nearly  300  people  to 
the  square  mile.  The  irrigated  lands  along  the  Nile  support  543  persons 
to  the  square  mile.  Such  a  settlement  of  the  Sacramento  Valley  would 
more  than  double  the  present  population  of  the  State.  It  is  believed  that 
an  irrigated  square  mile  in  this  valley  will  support  as  many  people  in 
comfort  as  now  live  on  an  equal  area  in  .either  of  the  other  districts  referred 
to  because  neither  of  these  surpasses  California  in  the  diversity  or  value  of 
its  products  or  the  excellence  of  its  markets. 

OBSTACLES  TO  DEVELOPMENT. 

In  September  last  I  saw  a  part  of  the  Sacramento  Valley  in  its  most 
unlovely  aspect.  One  of  the  trips  taken  was  from  Chico  to  Willows,  two 
towns  about  30  miles  apart,  but  the  road  followed  made  the  distance  trav- 
eled about  35  miles.  We  crossed  what  is  potentially  one  of  the  most  fertile 
and  promising  agricultural  districts  on  this  continent.  For  scores  of  miles 
the  land  rises  by  a  gentle  and  uniform  slope  from  the  Sacramento  River 
toward  the  foothills  on  either  side.  Water  would  flow  over  every  acre  of 
the  country  traversed  without  requiring  much  labor  in  its  direction  or  skill 
in  the  location  of  lateral  ditches.  The  plains  of  Lombardy  are  not  better 
suited  to  irrigation,  nor  the  soil  of  the  Nile  delta  more  fertile  than  were 
these  lands  originally.  For  a  half  century  they  have  been  devoted  to  the 
unremitting  production  of  cereal  crops.  Each  season  the  crop  has  been 
harvested,  the  grain  shipped  away,  and  the  straw  burned,  and  nothing  done 
to  replace  the  plant  food  withdrawn.  A  more  exhaustive  form  of  agriculture 
can  not  be  imagined.  Although  this  surprising  drain  has  gone  on  for  fifty 
years,  it  can  not  continue  forever.  Last  year's  crop  was  a  failure,  and  fail- 
ures will  follow  in  rapid  succession  hereafter  if  a  change  in  methods  is  not 
soon  made.  It  required  only  ten  years  of  continuous  grain  farming  at 
Greeley,  Colo.,  to  reduce  the  average  yield  from  40  bushels  to  12  bushels  of 


30  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

wheat  per  acre,  and  Greeley  is  one  of  tlie  most  prosperous  farming  districts 
in  the  West.  Less  than  ten  years  of  scientific  rotation  of  crops  restored  its 
original  fertility  and  production.  Diversified  farming  would  have  equally 
desirable  results  in  this  section  of  California,  but  rotation  of  crops  is  not,  pos- 
sible with  rainfall  .done.  The  moisture  is  neither  sufficient  in  amount  nor 
rightly  distributed  to  permit  of  this.  In  1897,  no  rain  fell  at  Chico  in  July 
and  August,  and  the  total  rainfall  from  May  to  October  was  less  than  1  inch. 
In  1898,  no  rain  fell  in  either  June,  July,  or  August.  In  1899,  no  rain  fell 
in  July  or  September,  and  only  0.12  of  an  inch  in  August.  At  Willows,  in 
1897,  no  rain  fell  in  either  July,  August,  or  September;  in  1898,  none  in 
July  or  August;  and  in  1899  there  was  again  a  three-months'  period  without 
sensible  precipitation.  The  absence  of  rainfall  during  the  harvest  period  is 
one  of  the  great  advantages  of  California  where  the  needed  moisture  can  be 
supplied  by  irrigation.  It  is  likewise  one  of  the  greatest  obstacles  to  diversi- 
fied agriculture  where  dependence  is  had  on  rainfall  alone.  The  natural 
opportunities  of  the  district  traversed  are  equal  to  if  not  greater  than  those  of 
the  country  surrounding  Riverside,  Cal.,  which  has  been  appropriately  desig- 
nated as  the  "Garden  Spot  of  America,"  but  a  difference  in  agricultural  ideas 
has  produced  a  corresponding  difference  in  conditions.  In  the  suburbs  of 
both  Chico  and  Willows  there  were  seen  attractive  homes  surrounded  by 
orchards  and  gardens,  but  5  miles  would  cover  the  distance  required  to  yet 
beyond  the  town  limits  of  either  place.  In  the  remaining  30  miles  only  six 
houses  were  passed  and  surrounding  these  were  neither  orchards  nor  gardens. 
The  distressing  effects  of  a  two-months' drought  and  the  absence  of  water  to 
mitigate  its  influence  were  only  too  manifest.  These  homes  were  a  signal 
illustration  of  the  truth  that  a  world  without  turf  is  a  dreary  desert.  Instead 
of  the  refreshing  green  of  an  irrigated  district,  or  of  a  country  where  there 
are  summer  rains,  everything  was  parched,  dusty,  and  lifeless.  Practically 
all  of  the  land  was  being  prepared  for  small  grain.  Less  than  100  acres  of 
alfalfa  were  seen  and  this  looked  as  though  it  was  prepared  to  surrender  the 
unequal  struggle.  One-third  of  the  land  had  been  summer  fallowed,  but 
much  of  it  was  in  no  condition  to  be  benefited,  as  the  clods  had  never  been 
pulverized  and  the  fertility  of  the  soil  was  being  burned  out  by  the  heat  and 
dryness  of  the  summer  sun. 

The  region  visited  is  one  of  bonanza  farms,  the  road  traversed  crossing 
one  of  40,000  acres.  A  mortgage  was  the  most  important  result  of  wheat 
growing  in  recent  years,  and  the  land  is  now  being  sold  to  satisfy  the  debts 
thus  created.  The  boundaries  of  other  large  estates  were  pointed  out  whose 
owners  were  historic  figures  in  the  early  days  of  California.  In  nearly 


OBSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  31 

every  instance  their  estates  have  passed  out  of  their  hands  and  out  of  the 
possession  of  their  descendants  ;ind  are  now  owned  by  hanks  or  capitalists 
in  San  Francisco,  having  been  taken  in  payment  of  loans  made  to  meet  the 
losses  incurred  in  "Towing  small  grain.  Nor  has  the  change  of  ownership 
affected  the  general  result.  The  present  owners  of  these  properties  will  not 
rent  them  to  tenants  who  can  not  give  a  satisfactory  bank  reference,  experi- 
ence having  shown  this  to  be  a  needed  precaution.  Although  equipped  with 
teams  and  machinery  and  understanding  the  California  climate  and  Cali- 
fornia agriculture,  many  of  these  tenants  have  at  the  end  of  the  year  walked 
out  of  the  valley,  leaving  both  crop  and  equipment  to  pay  the  debts  created 
by  their  failure. 

CALIFORNIA  AND  UTAH  COMPARED. 


lu  the  35  miles  traversed  there  were  only  two  schoolhouses.  Attending 
these  schools  was  only  one  child  whose  parents  owned  the  land  on  which 
they  lived.  The  other  pupils  were  the  children  of  foremen  and  tenants. 
The  county  superintendent  told  me  that  at  these  two  schools  there  were 
only  fifteen  children  These  conditions  of  alien  landlordism,  tenant 
fanning,  unoccupied  homes  and  scanty  population,  in  a  country  so  rich  in 
possibilities,  show  a  vital  economic  defect  in  methods.  The  situation  here 
\v;is  in  such  striking  contrast  with  what  had  been  seen  in  traveling  through 
an  irrigated  valley  in  Utah  the  month  before  that  the  difference  seems 
worthy  of  statement.  In  a  distance  of  15  miles,  along  Cottonwood  Creek, 
Utah,  there  was  not  a  farm  of  over  30  acres.  The  houses  and  barns  on 
these  little  farms  indicated  more  comfort  and  thrift  than  those  of  the  Sacra- 
mento Valley,  where  the  farms  are  ten  times  as  large.  The  average  popu- 
lation of  the  Utah  district  was  over  300  people  to  the  square  mile;  the 
district  traversed  in  California  has  less  than  10  people  to  the  square  mile. 
The  Utah  lands  range  in  value  from  $50  to  $150  an  acre;  the  lands  of  the 
Glenn  estate  in  the  Sacramento  Valley  are  being  offered  for  sale  from  $10 
to  $40  an  acre.  Every  natural  advantage  is  in  favor  of  California;  but  the 
Utah  district  is  irrigated,  the  other  is  not. 

OPPOSITION  TO  IRRIGATION. 

The  benefits  of  irrigation  seemed  so  obvious  and  the  necessity  for  it  so 
great  that  its  absence  was  at  first  attributed  to  lack  of  opportunity.  This, 
however,  is  not  the  case.  In  repeated  interviews  with  leading  citizens  of 
this  section  it  was  manifest  that  the  principal  reason  the  land  is  not  irrigated 
is  because  of  the  prejudice  against  irrigation.  The  first  gentleman  tfdked 


82  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

with  in  Chieo  said  that  irrigation  was  not  needed  for  either  fruit  or  grain 
growing.  The  second  said  it  would  bring  malaria  and  attendant  ills  and 
destroy  the  health  of  the  valley.  The  owner  of  an  irrigation  canal  said  that 
while  he  could  irrigate,  he  did  so  only  in  a  desultory  fashion,  and  did  not 
regard  it  as  beneficial.  What  T  learned  of  grain  growing  and  what  I  saw 
of  the  fruit  trees  and  the  fruit  being  gathered  did  not  tend  to  confirm 
these  opinions.  While  it  would  be  possible  to  make  such  wasteful  use  of 
water  as  to  injure  health,  the  experience  of  southern  California,  Arizona, 
and  New  Mexico,  where  the  summers  are  hotter  than  in  the  Sacramento 
Valley,  shows  that  this  result  does  not  follow  the  careful  use  of  water. 
The  causes  for  the  opposition  to  irrigation  must  be  looked  for  elsewhere. 
They  have  in  part  been  explained.  Others  are  not  obscure. 

THE  DESIRE  FOR  LARGE   ENTERPRISES. 

The  bonanza  wheat  farm  and  the  bonanza  orchard  were  in  accord  with 
the  spirit  which  from  the  first  has  dominated  the  industries  of  California. 
It  is  a  State  of  vast  enterprises.  Men  pride  themselves  on  great,  imder- 
takings  and  011  doing  whatever  they  undertake  on  a  large  scale.  Wheat 
can  be  grown  in  this  way.  The  man  with  capacity  for  organization  can 
look  after  the  growing  of  10,000  acres  of  wheat  as  easily  as  10  acres.  It  is 
an  industry  freed  from  detail.  There  is  a  period  of  seed  time  and  harvest, 
and  long  intervals  of  complete  freedom.  It  has  none  of  the  petty  incidents 
which  go  with  the  management  of  a  farm  where  there  are  chickens  and 
pigs,  where  cows  are  to  be  milked,  and  butter  and  eggs  marketed,  where 
each  mouth  has  its  duties,  and  where  there  is  no  time  when  something  does 
not  need  attention.  This  sort  of  farming  comes  with  high-priced  land  and 
a  dense  population,  but  it  does  not  appeal  to  the  imagination  like  the  plowing 
of  fields  so  large  that  turning  a  single  furrow  requires  a  day's  journey,  or 
the  cultivation  of  the  ground  with  steam  plows  and  harrows  which  require 
five-mule  teams  to  operate  them.  The  cutting,  thrashing,  and  sacking  of 
grain  at  a  single  operation  is  spectacular  as  well  as  effective.  In  this 
respect  it  resembles  the  range  cattle  business  in  its  best  days.  The  owner 
of  a  range  herd  was  more  than  a  money-maker,  he  was  practically  monarch 
of  all  he  surveyed.  The  cowboy  on  horseback  was  an  aristocrat;  the  irri- 
gator  on  foot,  working  through  the  hot  summer  days  in  the  mud  of  irrigated 
fields,  was  a  groveling  wretch.  In  cowboy  land  the  irrigation  ditch  has 
always  been  regarded  with  disfavor  because  it  is  the  badge  and  symbol  of  a 
despised  occupation.  The  same  feeling,  but  in  a  less  degree,  has  prevailed 
in  the  wheat-growing  districts  of  California,  and  for  much  the  same  reason. 


U.S.DEPT.  OFAGR.  BUL.10O    OFFICE   OF  EXPT.    STATIONS 


MAP 

STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA 

SHOWING    '['UK 
AREAS  INCLFDED  ftf  INVESTIGATIONS  AND  LOCATION 

O  K 
IKRKVATEll  AND  PARTLV  IRRIGATED  LANDS. 

Scale  of  miles 


:V         •••--< 
ft 

'-  >".4'?'    , 

*       ,  i-4>          — v— - ' 

<\  ri-       .  ° '—-"       •    'if  LAXE      | 

•»\v       1MS£\  -f,     j  TEin-svllk,  ^rf .  «»»*• 

"-'  Xv- —       "V---       •*"  ^/   ^ 

"~v\3  *:. 

•,   ^— iji,:  — ts-      ,,  «(•'''  \ 

<     '^-vSACRAMENTO^  ., 

V 


SAN  FRANCISCO  g 


CZl 


LEGEND 

A^ricu  Itural    Land    not  Requiring    Irrigation 

Land  Continuously  Irrigated 

Land    Partially  or  Occasionally  Irrigated 

Grain  and  Fruit  Lands 

Nona^ricultural    Land 

District    investigated    by  Wm.  E.  Smyths 

Marsden  Manson 
J.  M.Wilson 
Frank    Soule' 
C.E.Grunsky 
Chas.D.  Marx 
Edward    M.  Boggs 
Jas.  D.   Schuyler 
Jas.  D.  Schuyler 


\     r»o!"~«« 


MU.V'I  V 
/JU\K 


i  .  ,•„...•.""  •" 

,.- 

>/'•""''*,.„.„    \.-— '"' 

::v'^^,->^ 


\ 


ORSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  83 

CONTROVERSIES  OVER  DISTRICT  ENTERPRISES. 

Another  reason  for  the  prejudice  against  irrigation  in  California  has  been 
the  zeal  of  its  advocates  and  the  mistakes  made  because  of  their  enthusiasm. 
If,  in  connection  with  the  Wright  act,  there  could  have  been  some  public 
control  of  development  which  would  have  restricted  the  works  undertaken 
to  immediate  necessities  and  have  deferred  the  construction  of  large  and 
costly  works  until  the  feasibility  find  the  best  methods  of  construction 
could  have  been  fully  determined,  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  area  under 
irrigation  in  California  to-day  would  be  far  greater  than  it  is.  An  illustra- 
tion of  the  danger  of  making  haste  too  rapidly  was  seen  on  the  road  between 
Chico  and  Willows.  The  Central  Canal,  or  what  would  have  been  a  canal 
if  there  had  been  any  water  in  it,  was  several  times  crossed  during  this  ride. 
It  was  one  of  the  projects  inaugurated  under  the  Wright  district  law  and 
belongs  to  the  central  irrigation  district.  It  was  planned  to  irrigate  about 
156,000  acres,  and  estimated  to  cost  $750,000.  The  canal  was  begun  in  the 
face  of  active  and  influential  opposition  and  has  been  involved  in  litigation 
from  the  outset.  Five  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand  dollars  was 
expended  before  work  was  stopped.  Unless  the  project  is  carried  to  com- 
pletion this  large  sum  of  money  will  be  wholly  lost,  as  no  portion  of  the  canal 
is  being  used  or  can  be  used  in  its  present  condition.  Outside  of  hostile  public 
opinion  there  was  no  reason  why  this  canal  should  not  have  been  a  success. 
The  physical  obstacles  were  "not  serious;  there  is  an  abundance  of  water, 
and  the  lands  covered  by  the  canal  need  irrigation  and  are  well  adapted  to 
the  easy  and  efficient  distribution  of  water.  That  the  canal  will  ultimately 
be  completed  seems  inevitable,  because  the  increase  in  value  and  productive 
wealth  of  the  land  when  watered  will  warrant  this  The,  opposition  was  due 
in  part  to  the  size  and  cost  of  the  canal.  The  project  was  too  large.  Land- 
owners were  frightened  at  the  heavy  preliminary  outlay.  If,  instead  of  this 
immense  canal,  works  had  been  begun  in  a  small  way  with  a  ditch  large 
enough  to  water  5,000  acres,  and  its  extension  deferred  until  the  profits  of 
irrigation  had  been  demonstrated,  the  central  district  would,  in  my  opinion, 
have  been  a  success.  Opposition  to  the  enterprise  on  the  scale  undertaken 
was  not  wholly  unreasonable.  Irrigation  meant  a  complete  change  in  agri- 
cultural methods.  It  involved  either  the  breaking  up  of  the  large  estates, 
or  an  immense  outlay  on  the  part  of  their  owners  to  prepare  the  land  for 
beino-  watered.  Many  of  these  owners  were  not  financially  able  to  under- 
take the  latter.  The  conditions  were  all  favorable  to  a  small  project  and 
against  a  large  one.  But  the  fight  against  this  particular  project  has  led 

23856— No.  100—01 3 


34  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

many  to  oppose  irrigation  in  any  form.  Opposition  to  the  Wright  law 
has  caused  many  to  oppose  all  laws.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  this  prejudice 
and  antagonism  will  soon  be  ended.  A  united  sentiment  is  one  of  the 
requisites  to  success. 

OBSTACLES  PRESENTED  BY  INADEQUATE  WATER  LAWS. 

Many  of  those  who  desire  to  see  the  irrigated  area  extended  say  they 
see  no  way  to  accomplish  it.  At  Chico  it  was  stated  that  all  the  water  of 
that  section  was  now  owned;  that  the  Bidwell  estate  owned  Chico  Creek; 
that  the  Stanford  estate  owned  Butte  Creek;  that  some  other  estate,  whose 
name  has  been  forgotten,  owned  Rock  Creek,  and  that  any  extended  use 
of  the  Sacramento  River  would  give  rise  to  litigation  with  the  navigation 
interests.  To  the  inquiry  as  to  how  these  estates  acquired  the  ownership 
of  the  streams  named,  reply  was  made  that  no  one  understood  exactly  how 
a  title  was  established.  The  owners  of  these  estates  were  among  the  first 
settlers  and  acquired  the  rights  to  water  when  not  much  attention  was  paid 
to  such  matters.  All  those  talked  with  accepted  this  ownership  as  estab- 
lished, and  were  deterred  by  it  from  attempting  to  utilize  these  streams, 
where  otherwise  they  would  have  done  so.  Because  of  this  the  waters  of 
Chico  Creek  were  running  to  waste,  nothing  was  being  done  with  Butte 
Creek,  and  the  greater  part  of  Rock  Creek  was  sinking  in  the  sands.  Mean- 
while the  census  for  1900  shows  that  the  population  of  Chico  is  less  than  it 
was  ten  years  ago,  that  the  population  of  Willows  has  decreased,  and  that 
outside  of  the  irrigated  territory  there  is  stagnation  in  growth  and  waste  of 
opportunity. 

These  uncertain  but  sweeping  assertions  of  speculative  ownership  of 
water  and  the  hostility  of  water  users  to  the  recognition  of  the  control 
this  implies  have  given  rise  to  antagonisms  which  must  in  some  way  be 
removed.  The  farmer  fears  that  if  he  adopts  irrigation  he  will  become 
the  serf  of  the  canal  company.  The  capitalist  hesitates  about  irrigation 
investments  for  fear  of  contests  with  other  canals  and  the  reprisals  which 
hostile  public  sentiment  would  make  possible,  because  of  the  fact  that  the 
number  of  canal  owners  is  few  while  the  number  of  water  users  is  large. 
The  claim  of  speculative  ownership  of  water  and  the  recognition  of  this 
claim  in  some  cases  by  the  courts  has  been  met  by  the  law  giving  super- 
visors practically  unrestricted  power  to  fix  rates.  Neither  speculative 
ownership  nor  unrestricted  power  over  rates  can  continue  without  injury  to 
the  public,  and  both  should  give  way  to  institutions  of  justice.  The  time 
has  long  passed  when  makeshift  laws  and  temporary  expedients  should  be 


OBSTACLKS    TO     DKVKLOPMENT.  35 

resorted  to  in  dealing  with  this  subject.  There  never  was  a  time  when 
doubtful  or  controverted  policies  should  have  been  evaded  by  the  law- 
makers and  thrust  on  the  courts  for  settlement.  There  is  as  great  need  for 
specially  qualified  officers  to  determine  the  amount  of  the  water  supply  and 
regulate  its  distribution  as  there  is  to  survey  the  public  land  and  prepare 
maps  by  which  the  different  tracts  can  be  identified.  There  is  as  great,  if 
not  greater,  need  of  a  bureau  to  supervise  the  establishment  of  titles  to 
water  as  there  is  for  land  offices  to  manage  the  disposal  of  public  land. 
Why  have  we  recognized  the  need  of  one  and  ignored  the  other?  The 
answer  is  to  be  found  in  the  inherited  jurisprudence  and  prejudice  of  our 
race,  which  for  centuries  has  regarded  water  as  something  to  be  got  rid  of 
rather  than  a  resource  to  be  transferred  and  measured  and  stored,  and 
finally  absorbed  in  use.  That  is  the  status  of  water  in  California,  where 
streams  are  of  greater  actual  value  than  all  the  gold  in  the  hills  or  the 
oil  in  the  valleys. 

The  discovery  of  gold  in  California  and  the  use  of  water  in  irrigation 
brought  the  people  of  that  State  face  to  face  with  two  new  issues.  One  of 
these  was  the  enactment  of  laws  for  the  control  and  use  of  the  land  which 
contained  placer  gold;  the  other  was  the  creation  of  laws  and  customs  for 
the  orderly  determination  of  ownership  of  streams  and  for  their  distribution. 
In  their  efforts  at  solving  one  of  these  problems,  California  achieved  a 
satisfactory  if  not  striking  success.  The  code  of  mining  laws  provides  for 
a  final  and  definite  determination  of  title  to  a  particular  tract  of  land.  The 
steps  through  which  this  evolution  was  accomplished  are  of  historic  and 
economic  interest.  They  began  in  a  common  agreement  that  a  claim  should 
embrace  only  the  area  a  man  could  work,  and  this  was  fixed  as  the  distance 
'in  each  direction  he  could"  reach  with  a  pick,  and  made  the  claim  about  8  feet 
square.  There  was  no  attempt  to  establish  ownership  of  the  land  itself;  the 
right  endured  during  occupation  only.  When  one  individual  ceased  to  work 
a  claim,  anyone  else  could  relocate  it  and  take  possession.  With  increase  of 
population  and  the  employment  of  capital  other  measures  were  necessary, 
and  a  working  code  of  laws  was  evolved  to  meet  the  changed  conditions. 
This  code  of  laws  provided  for  notices  of  location,  for  the  recording  of  these 
notices,  and  a  simple  procedure,  before  specially  qualified  officers,  to  prove 
compliance  with  the  law,  which  proof  is  followed  by  the  issuance  by  the 
Government  of  a  patent  to  the  claim  which  is  as  stable  and  certain  an 
evidence  of  ownership  as  a  patent  to  a  homestead.  This  law  limits  the  acres 
which  can  be  filed  on.  It  determines  the  shape  of  a  full-sized  claim  and 
makes  provision  for  properly  qualified  officers  and  engineers  to  carry  out 


36  IRRIGATION    INVKSTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

the  law.  Hence  every  one  knows,  or  can  easily  learn,  how  mining-  rights 
are  acquired  and  what  is  the  legal  status  of  any  particular  claim. 

The  establishment  of  water  laws  began  in  the  same  manner.  At  first 
every  user  of  a  stream  thought  use  the  essential  element,  but  little  thought 
was  given  to  the  establishment  of  rights  equivalent  to  ownership.  When 
the  gold  was  washed  from  claims,  the  ditch  which  supplied  water  \vas  aban- 
doned with  the  claim,  and  the  property  right  in  the  stream  was  probably 
not  thought  of  further.  As  the  use  of  streams  extended  and  irrrigation  and 
domestic  uses  were  added  to  mining  it  became  manifest  that  water  rights 
were  to  have  an  enduring  value,  and  provision  was  made  for  recording 
notices  of  the  appropriation  of  streams.  As  time  went  on  people  began  to 
give  more  and  more  attention  to  the  legal  forms  by  which  rights  to  water 
were  recorded,  and  to  regard  a  compliance  with  these  forms  as  not  only  of 
more  importance  in  securing  title  than  the  actual  use  of  the  water,  but  as 
being  the  principal  consideration  in  determining  ownership.  In  the  evolu- 
tion of  the  California  water  laws  none  of  the  safeguards  which  surround  the 
placer-mining  law  were  incorporated.  It  places  no  limit  011  the  volume  of 
water  which  can  be  appropriated,  it  does  not  make  clear  whether  the  extent 
of  the  right  is  to  be  fixed  by  the  carrying  capacity  of  the  ditch  or  canal,  or 
the  needs  of  the  land  watered,  or  independent  of  either.  It  is  ambiguous  as 
to  whether  the  appropriator  owns  the  water  or  has  only  a  usufructory  rig]  it. 
What  was  done  in  effect  was  to  throw  open  the  record  books  of  every 
county  in  the  State  to  the  entry  of  any  sort  of  a  claim  against  its  most 
valued  property  which  need  or  greed  might  encourage.  The  results  on 
nine  streams  are  outlined  in  the  reports  which  follow.  These  reports 
do  not,  however,  give  an  adequate  impression  of  the  existing  situation. 
The  original  plan  was  to  publish  an  abstract  of  all  these  claims.  Such  an 
abstract  was  prepared  by  a  number  of  the  observers.  With  only  a  line 
for  each  claim,  the  publication  of  this  list  would  have  doubled  the  size  and 
cost  of  this  report.  Except  to  show  how  worse  than  useless  is  the  law,  the 
list  has  no  value.  It  gives  no  indication  of  the  existing  or  intended  use  of 
water.  There  are  3'2  consecutive  claims  to  all  the  water  of  San  Joaquin 
River,  and  the  aggregate  of  these  claims  represents  moisture  enough  to  sub- 
merge this  continent.  The  humor  of  the  situation  is  shown  in  the  reports 
of  Mr.  Boggs  and  Professor  Soule.  The  evil  comes  in  the  failure  of  the  law 
to  afford  any  adequate  protection  to  those  who  comply  with  its  provisions. 

Evil  communications  corrupt  good  manners  and  misleading  laws  pervert 
public  opinion.  Because  the  water  laws  of  California  provide  for  the  legal 
record  of  notices  which  assert  rights  to  all  the  water  of  streams  men  have 


01SSTACLKS    TO     DKVKI.oI'MKNT.  37 

come  to  accept -tin-  private  ;ui<l  even  the  speculative  ownership  of  water  as 
one  of  the  natural,  if  not  inevitable,  incidents  of  its  use  in  irrigation.  It  is 
only  human  nature  tor  individuals  or  companies,  after  they  have  paid  the 
recording  tee  for  such  not.ice  ami  it  has  stood  unchallenged  on  the  public 
records  tor  years,  to  believe  tltev  own  the  water  claimed  in  the  notice.  The 
notices  gi vcn  below'  are  taken  from  the  official  records  of  appropriations 
from  the  San  Joaquin  River  and  tributaries  as  copied  by  Professor  Soule*. 
The  water  records  of  California  contain  thousands  of  such  statements. 

No  matter  what  courts  may  declare  or  reformers  urge,  so  long  as  the 
sort  of  procedure  which  the  San  Joaquin  record  illustrates  is  continued  men 
who  file  claims  will  regard  speculative  ownership  of  water  as  authorized  by 
the  law  of  appropriation  in  California.  In  talking  of  this  an  intelligent,  fair- 
minded  ditch  owner  last  year  voiced  the  prevailing  opinion  in  the  following 
words:  "I  filed  on  this  water,  and  it  is  mine  to  do  with  as  I  please.  I  can  run 
it  into  a  gopher  hole  if  I  want  to.  I  can  sell  it,  or  rent  it  to  my  neighbors,  or 
I  can  waste  it  in  the  sand,  and  neither  the  Government  nor  State  has  any 
right  to  object."  The  question  before  the  people  of  California  is,  "Is  or  is 
not  this  the  doctrine  of  water  ownership  which  ought  to  prevail?  If  not, 
what  is  to  take  its  place  .'"  Xo  matter  what  policy  is  adopted,  it  ought  to  be 
definite  and  all  rights  made  to  conform  to  its  conditions.  Of  the  policy 
of  doing  nothing,  deciding  nothing,  there  has  been  enough.  Something 
more  is  now  required.  This  is  a  comprehensive  code  of  laws  which  will  be 
as  just  and  effective  as  those  of  Italy,  or  Canada,  or  Wyoming,  which  will 
represent-  the  knowledge  of  the  twentieth  century  rather  than  a  blind 
adherence  to  the  conditions  of  fifty  years  ago.  It  is  a  significant  fact  that 
the  best  irrigation  laws  do  not  permit  of  the  unrestricted  filing  of  claims. 
In  fact  they  do  not  permit  water  to  be  appropriated.  Italy  issues  licenses 
to  take  water;  other  countries  treat  rights  to  use  streams  as  franchises.  In 

1  Know  all  men  whom  it  may  concern  that  I,  —  — ,  have  this  8th  day  of  October,  1877, 

appropriated  all  the  water  of  the  west  and  east  forks  of  Willow  Creek,  together  with  the  entire  amount 
of  water  flowing  down  Willow  Creek,  and  emptying  into  the  north  fork  of  the  San  Joaquin  River,  in 
('nine  Valley  *  :  to  be  done  by  ditch  and  flume  of  S  feet  wide  by  2  feet  deep. 

Notice  is  hereby  given  that  —  —  claim  by  priority  of  location,  use,  and  appropriation  the 

first  rijiht  to  the  use  of  water  running  in  the  San  Joaquin  River  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation,  navigation, 
inn!  supplying  towns  and  villages  with  said  water,  and  also  for  motive  and  mining  purposes.  Said  use 
and  appropriation  to  be  exercised  as  circumstances  may  require,  either  by  using  said  water  as  it  natur- 
ally flows  in  said  river,  or  diverting  the  same,  or  increasing  its  volume  in  such  mode  as  may  be  deemed 
requisite. 

NOTICE. — I,  —  — ,  do  this  day  locate,  appropriate,  and  claim  the  water  now  flowing  and 

hereafter  to  flow  in  Kig  Creek  from  a  point  at  and  above  where,  this  notice  is  posted  on  said  stream,  to 
the  extent  of  100,000  inches,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure.  I  intend  to  divert  said  water 

by  ditches  of  the  capacity  of  said  100,000  incites  and  by  flumes  of  the  same  capacity. 


38  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Wyoming1  anyone  desiring  to  use  water  must  obtain  a  permit  to  use  it 
from  the  State.  To  have  regulation  precede  the  asserted  individual  own- 
ership or  control  has  two  advantages.  It  enables  everyone  to  understand 
from  the  outset  just  what  one's  rights  are  and  commits  the  Government  to 
the  protection  of  the  rights  officially  indorsed. 

APPROPRIATIONS  FOR  SALE,  RENTAL,   OR  DISTRIBUTION. 

It  is  the  belief  of  the  writer  that  rights  to  water  should  be  for  use  only; 
that  appropriations  for  irrigation  purposes  should  not  belong  to  either  a 
canal  company  or  an  owner  of  land,  but  should  attach  to  the  land  irrigated 
and  be  inseparable  therefrom.  Where  this  doctrine  prevails,  canals  and 
ditches  become,  like  railroads,  great  semipublic  utilities,  means  of  convey- 
ance of  a  public  commodity,  their  owners  entitled  to  adequate  compensation 
for  services  rendered,  but  having  no  ownership  in  the  property  distributed. 
Believing  this,  the  law  which  permits  appropriations  of  water  for  sale,  rental, 
or  distribution  is  regarded  as  unwise  and  dangerous.  It  accomplishes  no 
good  result  that  the  attachment  of  appropriations  to  the  land  irrigated 
would  not  promote.  On  the  other  hand,  permitting  individuals  or  corpora- 
tions to  appropriate  water  which  irrigators  must  have  in  order  to  live,  gives 
rise  to  antagonisms  and  makes  possible  grave  abuses,  the  nature  of  which 
is  shown  over  and  over  again  in  the  reports  which  follow  and  which  has 
been  characterized  in  the  following  striking  statement  made  by  William  E. 
Smythe : 

If  we  admit  the  theory  that  water  flowing  from  the  melting  snows  and  gathered  in  lake  and 
stream  is  a  private  commodity  Monging  to  him  who  first  appropriates  it,  regardless  of  the  use  for 
which  he  designs  it,  we  have  all  the  conditions  for  a  hateful  economic  servitude.  Next  to  bottling  the 
air  and  sunshine  no  monopoly  of  natural  resources  would  be  fraught  with  more  possibilities  of  abuse 
than  the  attempt  to  make  merchandise  of  water  in  an  arid  land. 

The  doctrine  of  private  or  speculative  ownership  of  water  has  not  thus 
far  benefited  those  who  have  appropriated  water  to  rent  or  sell.  It  has  made 
them  trustees  or  agents  for  users  and  thrust  on  them  all  the  expense  of 
fighting  rival  appropriators  in  the  courts  for  control  of  the  supply.  It  makes 
every  user  of  water  feel  that  he  is  the  victim  of  an  unjust  discrimination 
because,  while  the  appropriator  gets  the  water  from  the  stream  as  a  free 
grant,  he  has  to  pay  for  the  share  he  enjoys. 

The  relative  merits  of  laws  which  attach  appropriations  to  the  land  and 
those  which,  like  California,  make  the  ditch  or  canal  owner  the  appropriator 
is  not  a  matter  of  theory  or  conjecture.  In  every  country  where  rights  attach 
to  the  land  irrigators  are  prosperous  and  peace  prevails.  In  countries  where 
control  of  water  and  ownership  of  land  are  separated  controversies  and 


OBSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  39 

abuses  abound.  There  is  no  exception.  The  situation  in  Wyoming  as  con- 
trasted with  that  in  California  shows  that  the  arid  West  is  not  destined  to 
furnish  one.  If  human  experience  has  anv  value  we  ought  to  heed  its 
lessons,  and  the  following  extracts  from  official  reports  dealing  with  this 
issue  are  so  pertinent  as  to  be  worthy  of  insertion: 

A  recognition  of  the  danger  of  allowing  water  to  be  monopolized  without  regard  to  the  land  has 
led  a  commission  appointed  to  inquire  into  Californian  irrigation  to  declare  that  "as  a  matter  of  public 
policy  it  is  desirable  that  the  land  and  water  be  joined  never  to  be  cut  asunder;  that  the  farmers  should 
enjoy  in  perpetuity  the  use  of  the  water  necessary  for  the  irrigation  of  their  respective  lands;  that 
when  the  land  is  sold  the  right  to  water  .shall  also  be  sold  with  it,  and  that  neither  shall  be  sold  sepa- 
rately.— Australian  Report  on  American  Irrigation. 

Italian  experience,  French  experience,  and  Spanish  experience  all  go  to  show  that  the  interests 
to  be  studied  in  relation  to  irrigation  schemes  are  so  many  and  so  various,  and  so  intimately  bound  up 
with  the  public  welfare,  that  State  control  is  imperatively  necessary,  and  that  for  the  protection  of  its 
citi/ens  no  monopoly  can  be  permitted  which  would  separate  property  in  water  from  property  in  the 
land  to  which  it  is  applied. — Fourth  Progress  Report,  Royal  Commission  on  Water  Supply,  Victoria, 
Australia. 

European  experience  shows  <  •  *  »  that  where  waters  belonging  to  the  State  are  farmed  and 
relet  by  private  individuals  water  rights  are  a  constant  source  of  gross  injustice  and  endless  litigation. 
The  consequence  of  these  interminable  vexations  is  that  the  poorer  or  more  peaceably  disposed  land- 
holder is  obliged  to  sell  his  possessions  to  a  richer  or  more  litigious  proprietor,  and  the  whole  district 
gradually  passes  into  the  hands  of  a  single  holder. — G.  P.  Marsh,  formerly  United  States  minister  to 
Italy. 

The  ancient  principles  of  common  law  applying  to  the  use  of  natural  streams,  so  wise  and  equi- 
table in  a  humid  region,  would,  if  applied  to  the  arid  region,  practically  prohibit  the  growth  of  its  most 
important  industries.  Thus  it  is  that  a  custom  is  springing  up  in  the  arid  region  which  may  or  may 
not  have  color  of  authority  in  statutory  or  common  law;  on  this  I  do  not  wish  to  express  an  opinion, 
but  certain  it  is  that  water  rights  are  practically  being  severed  from  the  natural  channels  of  the  streams, 
and  this  must  be  done.  In  the  change  it  is  to  be  feared  that  water  rights  will  in  many  cases  be  sepa- 
rated from  all  land  rights  as  the  system  is  now  forming.  If  this  fear  is  not  groundless,  to  the  extent 
that  such  a  separation  is  secured  water  will  become  a  property  independent  of  the  land,  and  this 
property  will  be  gradually  absorbed  by  a  few.  Monopolies  of  water  will  be  secured,  and  the  whole 
agriculture  of  the  country  will  be  tributary  thereto — a  condition  of  affairs  which  an  American  citizen 
having  in  view  the  interests  of  the  largest  number  of  people  can  not  contemplate  with  favor. 

Practically  in  that  country  the  right  to  water  is  acquired  by  priority  of  utilization,  and  this  is  as 
it  should  be  from  the  necessities  of  the  country.  But  two  important  qualifications  are  needed.  The 
user  right  should  attach  to  the  land  where  used,  not  to  the  individual  or  company  constructing  the 
canals  by  which  it  is  used.  The  right  to  the  water  should  inhere  in  the  land  where  it  is  used;  the 
priority  of  usage  should  secure  the  right.  But  this  needs  some  slight  modification.  A  farmer  settling 
on  a  small  tract,  to  be  redeemed  by  irrigation,  should  be  given  a  reasonable  length  of  time  in  which  to 
secure  his  water  right  by  utilization,  that  he  may  secure  it  by  his  own  labor,  either  directly  by  con- 
structing the  waterways  himself  or  indirectly  by  cooperating  with  his  neighbors  in  constructing  systems 
of  waterways.  Without  this  provision  there  is  little  inducement  for  poor  men  to  commence  farming 
operations,  and  men  of  ready  capital  only  will  engage  in  such  enterprises.  *  *  *  The  right  to  use 
imtir  should  inhere  in  the  land  to  be  irrigated,  and  water  rights  should  go  with  land  titles. — Land  of  the  Arid 
Region,  by  J.  W.  Powell. 

The  European  country  which  most  nearly  resembles  California  is 
southern  Spain.  The  rainfall  in  Spain  is  less  than  that  of  California,  and 
irrigation  is  indispensable.  Spanish  water  laws  are  the  outcome  of  a  thou- 
sand years'  experience,  in  which  local  customs  widely  different  in  character 


40  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

have  long  operated  side  by  side  in  different  districts  of  the  same  province. 
The  small  size  and  contiguity  of  these  districts  makes  it  certain  that  climate 
and  soil  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  difference  in  the  prosperity  observed 
among  the  farmers.  The  situation  there  resembles  what  would  prevail  in 
California  if  each  county  of  the  State  had  a  different  code  of  water  laws 
and  a  different  doctrine  regarding  water  rights.  There  has  been  time 
enough  to  work  out  to  a  final  result  the  influence  of  the  different  doctrines  of 
water  ownership.  In  Valencia,  the  most  beautiful  and  prosperous  section 
of  Spain,  irrigated  agriculture  dates  back  to  the  Moors.  Water  rights  are 
founded  on  customs  which  are  older  than  records.  Water  and  land  are 
inseparable.  Every  writer  who  has  visited  Valencia  is  of  the  opinion  that 
the  thrift,  the  skill,  and  the  success  shown  by  farmers  comes  from  the 
peace  and  security  which  go  with  the  control  of  both  elements  of  production 
in  an  arid  region — water  and  land.  In  the  same  province  the  results  of  the 
separate  ownership  of  water  and  land- are  as  completely  manifest.  In  the 
district  of  Elche  water  was  originally  controlled  by  the  landowners,  but  land 
and  water  were  not  made  inseparable.  Gradually  water  rights  were  bought 
up  by  outsiders.  Now  the  farmer  buys  water  from  these  owners  of  streams 
just  as  he  does  fertilizers.  The  water  tolls  have  been  raised,  farmers  impov- 
erished, and  all  progress  and  prosperity  banished.  In  the  province  of  Murcia 
water  is  attached  to  the  land  and  farmers  are  prosperous.  In  Lorca  land 
and  water  are  separated,  and  the  result,  says  a  recent  report,  is  "large 
profits  for  the  water  owner,  poor  farmers,  and  languishing  agriculture." 

Which  of  these  two  policies  does  California  propose  to  adhere  to?  The 
recognition  of  property  rights  in  water  and  their  separation  from  land  can 
lead  to  but  one  result:  Development  of  irrigation  will  be  corporate  and 
great  aggregations  of  capital. will  control  the  water  resources  of  the  West, 
Thus  far  court  decisions  in  California  have  been  conflicting.  As  alreadv 
stated,  the  policy  adopted  ought  not  to  be  chosen  in  the  light  of  what  is,  but 
in  the  light  of  what  ought  to  be.  The  experience  of  Europe  shows  that  the 
ownership  of  water  apart  from  land  can  not  prevail  without  creating  grave 
abuses,  and,  no  matter  what  the  trouble  or  cost  of  getting  on  a  proper  1  ins  is 
may  be,  it  ought  to  be  done.  Experience  in  the  arid  States  of  this  country 
has  also  shown  that  separate  ownership  of  water  and  land  results  in  contests 
and  expensive  lawsuits,  while  union  of  land  and  water  greatly  lessens  these 
evils  or  ends  them  entirely.  Hence  it  can  not  be  public  interest  but  private 
selfishness  which  rejects  this  doctrine. 

In  Wyoming  and  Nebraska  the  true  principle  has  already  been  adopted 
by  the  State  boards  of  control  and  put  into  practice  with  the  best  results. 


OBSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  41 

If  it  can  be  maintained  and  speedily  extended  to  California,  it  will  riot  only 
relieve  this  State  of  many  existing  complications  but  will  put  her  irrigation 
system  in  accord  with  the  best  thought  and  experience  of  the  time. 

These  views  are  based  on  eighteen  years'  personal  contact  with  users 
of  water  in  States  where  ditch  owners  are  the  water  owners  and  in  States 
where  water  rights  are  inseparable  from  the  land.  The  result  of  that 
experience  shows  that  attaching  water  to  land  makes  for  peace;  attaching  it  to 
the  ditch  owner  makes  for  war.  So  long  as  ditch  owners  are  the  appropriators 
they  have  to  maintain  a  dual  conflict.  They  must  strive  with  other  ditch 
owners  for  control  of  the  stream  and  with  water  users  over  the  quantity 
and  price  of  the  water  delivered.  On  the  other  hand,  where  ditches  are 
made  earners  of  water  and  appropriations  attached  to  the  land,  the  expense 
of  the  struggle  over  a  fair  division  of  streams  does  not  fall,  as  it  does  in  Cali- 
fornia, solely  on  the  owners  of  canals.  It  falls  on  the  landowners,  and  it 
has  not  taken  long  in  the  States  where  users  have  to  bear  the  cost  and  loss 
of  an  unfair  division  to  end  this  expense  and  uncertainty  by  putting  streams 
under  State  control.  Where  appropriations  attach  to  the  land  ditch  owners 
have  no  responsibility  except  to  deliver  what  comes  to  the  headgate.  For 
this  service  the}-  are  entitled  to  fair  compensation,  and  come  nearer  receiving 
it  than  do  the  ditch  and  water  owners  of  California,  where  rates  are  fixed 
by  a  tribunal  and  a  procedure  which  makes  the  practical  confiscation  of 
investments  more  than  a  possibility.  The  doctrine  of  private  ownership  of 
water  has  not  thus  far  in  this  country  worked  to  the  benefit  of  the  ditch 
owner.  On  the  contrary,  it  has  been  the  greatest  evil  with  which  he  has 
had  to  contend.  It  has  been  a  potent  source  of  hostile  public  sentiment;  it 
has  led  to  retributive  legislation,  of  which  the  laws  for  fixing  water  rates  in 
California  and  Colorado  are  signal  illustrations.  What  may  be  the  oppor- 
tunities of  this  policy  in  the  future  as  water  becomes  scarcer  and  more 
valuable  it  is  impossible  to  say,  but  the  dangers  to  ditch  companies  are  fully 
as  pronounced  as  are  the  possibilities  of  increased  profit.  Whatever  views 
may  be  held  regarding  this  matter,  there  is  one  thing  about  which  there  can 
be  no  dispute,  and  that  is  that  the  present  uncertainty  should  be  ended. 
So  long  as  it  continues  California  is  in  no  condition  to  either  solicit  develop- 
ment by  private  capital  or  aid  through  State  or  national  appropriations. 
Private  control  of  streams  is  infinitely  to  be  preferred  to  no  control.  Taking 
the  most  extreme  view  of  speculative  rights  which  would  give  to  each  of 
these  recorded  notices  its  face  value,  it  would  at  least  give  investors  a  basis 
on  which  to  build  canals  and  extend  the  distribution  of  streams  which  now 
run  to  waste.  On  the  other  hand,  if  rights  are  to  be  measured  by  actual 


42  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

use,  a  knowledge  of  the  quantity  of  water  which  now  runs  to  the  sea  will 
serve  as  a  guide  to  the  opportunities  for  new  and  later  appropriations.  But 
so  long  as  the  nature  of  an  appropriation  is  unsettled,  so  long  will  records 
of  claims  to  water  be  a  constant  temptation  to  revive  old  projects  and  Antalize 
dead  rights,  with  a  resulting  increase  in  litigation  and  controversy  over 
streams. 

RIPARIAN  RIGHTS. 

The  perplexities  of  water  users  have  been  increased  in  California  by 
the  recognition  of  riparian  rights,  which  give  to  any  landowner  along  the 
margin  of  a  stream  the  right  to  have  its  water  flow  past  his  land  unimpaired 
in  quality  and  undiminished  in  volume,  or,  at  least,  it  renders  uncertain  the 
extent  to  which  the  volume  may  be  diminished.  This  law  is  borrowed  from 
rainy,  foggy  England,  where  it  has  a  climatic  fitness,  because  civilization 
in  that  country  began  with  the  draining  of  bogs  and  marshes,  and  the  chief 
utility  of  rivers  is  to  drain  the  water  off  the  land;  but  the  doctrine  has  no 
place  in  a  country  where  all  the  water  streams  carry  should  be  diverted 
and  used.  It  has  been  abrogated  in  all  the  States  wholly  within  the  arid 
region.  Not  only  has  the  doctrine  been  abrogated  in  Colorado,  Wyoming, 
Montana,  Idaho,  Utah,  Nevada,  and  the  Territories  of  Arizona  and  New 
Mexico,  but  in  the  provinces  of  Victoria  and  New  South  Wales  in  Australia 
and  the  Northwest  Territories  of  Canada.  All  these  provinces  are  colonies 
of  Great  Britain,  where  regard  for  the  time-honored  precedents  of  the  mother 
country  would  supposedly  be  greater  than  in  the  United  States.  The  abro- 
gation of  this  doctrine  in  these  provinces  was  not  made  until  after  a  careful 
study  of  irrigation  in  both  Europe  and  America.  The  commissioner  who 
made  the  investigation  for  the  Canadian  government,  in  a  recent  paper 
describing  the  Canadian  code  of  irrigation  laws,  says: 1  "It  recognizes  as  a 
foundation  principle  that  only  by  the  absolute  repeal  of  the  common  law  of 
riparian  rights  can  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation  be  successfully  introduced." 
The  same  view  is  held  in  the  States  and  Territories  of  this  country  where 
the  doctrine  has  been  set  aside.  The  supreme  court  of  Utah,  in  one  of  the 
earliest  decisions  on  this  question,  used  the  following  argument  in  support 
of  its  action: 

Riparian  rights  have  never  been  recognized  in  this  Territory,  or  in  any  State  or  Territory  where 
irrigation  is  necessary,  for  the  appropriation  of  water  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation  is  entirely  and 
unavoidably  in  conflict  with  the  common-law  doctrine  of  riparian  proprietorship.  If  that  had  been 

1 J.  S.  Dennis,  deputy  commissioner  of  public  works,  Canada.  U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr. ,  Office  of*  Experi- 
ment Stations  Bui.  86. 


OBSTACLKS    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  43 

recognized  and  applied  in  this  Territory,  it  would  still  be  a  desert;  for  a  man  owning  10  acres  of  land 
on  a  stream  of  water  capable  of  irrigating  1,001!  acres  of  land  or  more  near  its  mouth  could  prevent  the 
settlement  of  all  the  land  above  him;  for  at  common  law  the  riparian  proprietor  is  entitled  to  have 
the  water  flow  in  quantity  and  quality  past  his  land  as  it  was  wont  to  do  when  he  acquired  title 
thereto,  and  this  right  is  utterly  irreconcilable  with  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation.  The  legislature  of 
this.  Territory  has  always  ignored  this  claim  of  riparian  proprietors,  and  the  practice  and  usages  of  the 
inhabitants  have  never  considered  it  applicable  and  have  never  regarded  it. — Stowell  r.  Johnson,  26 
Pac.  Rep.,  290. 

In  California  no  definite  laws  establishing  or  abrogating  the  doctrine  as 
;i|i]ilic(l  to  irrigation  have  been  passed,  and,  as  a  result  of  this  and  of  the 
further  fact  that  the  laws  of  the  State  are  in  conflict  with  the  constitution,  the 
supreme  court  of  the  State  was  compelled  to  practically  enter  the  field  of 
legislation  when  called  upon  1o  decide  the  case  of  Lux  v.  Haggin.  (69  Cal., 
I'")').)  In  this  case  Lux  represented  the  riparian  doctrine  and  Plaggiu  the 
right  to  use  streams  in  irrigation.  It  so  happened  that  this  case  arose  in  a 
section  of  the  State  where  crops  can  be  grown  without  irrigation,  and  so  the 
recognition  of  the  doctrine  did  not  necessarily  mean,  as  has  been  contended 
by  the  attorneys,  that  the  settlers  who  were  diverting  water  would  have  to 
abandon  their  homes  if  deprived  of  it,  as  they  would  have  had  to  do  in  Utah 
and  even  in  some  sections  of  California. 

The  fact  that  in  a  preceding  case  the  same  issues  had  been  presented  to 
the  court  and  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  set  aside,  and  that  in  this  case 
three  out  of  seven  judges  believed  it  ought  to  be  set  aside,  gives  reason  for 
an  interesting  conjecture  as  to  what  the  result  might  have  been  if  this 
historic  case  had  involved  orange  lands  where  irrigation  is  a  necessity 
instead  of  wheat  lands  where  it  has  not  been  so  regarded. 

This  misgiving  as  to  whether  a  strict  construction  of  the  law  required  a 
decision  so  contrary  to  climatic  necessities  and  which  has  proven  so  injurious 
to  development  does  not  in  any  way  reflect  upon  the  court.  Its  duty  was 
to  interpret  the  law  as  it  existed  regardless  of  consequences,  and  then  to 
enforce  its  policy  with  equal  disregard  of  results.  This,  however,  is  not 
what  has  happened.  The  decision  was  really  a  compromise.  While  it 
refuses  the  right  to  appropriate  or  divert  water  to  irrigate  nonriparian 
land,  it  allows  it  to  be  used  on  riparian  land.1  The  right  to  use  streams 
accorded  riparian  proprietors  has  been  so  liberally  construed  in  subse- 
quent decisions  that  it  now  resembles  more  nearly  that  claimed  by  appro- 
priators  than  the  riparian  doctrine  as  originally  understood.  The  economic 
import  of  the  decision  has  not  been  what  the  counsel  for  appropriators 


1  "The  right  of  the  riparian  proprietors  to  a  reasonable  use  of  the  stream  for  the  purposes  of  irriga- 
tion is  recognized  in  many  of  the  California  cases,  etc."     (69  Cal.,  409.) 


44  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

or  the  three  dissenting  judges  believed  it  would  be,  as  is  shown   by  the 
following  extracts: 

The  interests  involved  are  of  such  magnitude,  not  only  as  between  the  parties  themselves,  but 
also  as  to  thousands  of  others,  and  the  result  reached  so  disastrous  to  the  defendant.*,  so  destructive 
to  the  vast  and  beneficial  improvements  made  by  them  in  good  faith  and  in  the  belief  that  the  same 
law  as  to  those  matters  applied  both  to  the  State  and  Government  lands  in  California,  so  disastrous  to 
the  people  of  a  large  part  of  California,  and  so  destructive  of  all  those  great  interests  which  have 
grownup  under  the  irrigation  system  based  upon  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  to  beneficial  uses. 

that  we  (irmly  believe  your  honors  will  wish,  even  if  in  the  end  you  feel  i pelled  to  adhere  to  the 

views  already  expressed,  to  do  so  only  after  you  have  permitted  argument  to  be  exhausted  upon  the 
subject  and  have  received  all  the  light  which  the  profession  can  give.  No  matter  how  onerous  and 
pressing  the  duties  which  devolve  upon  your  honors,  there  is,  we  submit,  before  you  no  question  or 
business  which  can  compare  in  public  interest  to  the  inquiry  whether  the  decree  shall  stand  which 
condemns  to  absolute  barrenness  the  thousands  of  acres  of  land  reclaimed  from  the  desert  by  the  vast 
expenditures  of  the  defendants  here  and  now  a  garden  of  productiveness  and  beauty,  in  obedience  to 
the  law  of  another  country,  based  upon  its  customs,  and  arising  under  conditions  the  most  diverse 
from  ours;  whether,  in  obedience  to  that  law,  a  large  pail  of  this  State,  after  a  progress  almost  unparal- 
leled and  improvements  made  at  incalculable  cost  of  labor  and  treasure,  is  to  be  condemned  to  return 
to  sterility  and  unproductiveness;  whether,  in  obedience  to  that  law,  the  wheel  of  progress  is  to  be 
turned  back  and  the  present  prosperity  of  thousands  changed  into  ruin  and  poverty  that  a  few  men 
who  happen  to  own  land  on  the  banks  Mow  may  enjoy  the  pleasure  of  seeing  the  stream  flow  as  it  was 
accustomed  to  flow.  Your  honors  will  not,  we  are  sure,  forget  that  this  decree,  if  it  is  to  stand,  not 
only  overthrows  the  progress  of  the  past,  but  puts  a  perpetual  bar  upon  future  progress  and  develop- 
ment. For  if  the  purchase  of  the  smallest  subdivision  of  land  on  a  stream  below  gives  riparian 
rights,  overthrows  the  settled  policy  of  the  State,  and  changes  its  laws,  no  man  will  venture  to  expend 
a  dollar  in  turning  water,  which  is  the  lifeblood  of  California,  upon  her  comparatively  waterless 
land. — Extract  from  argument  in  favor  of  rehearing  by  John  Garber,  of  Garber,  Thornton  &  Bishop. 
The  doctrine  that  the  water  of  a  stream  must  continue  to  flow  in  its  natural  course  undiminished 
in  quantity,  has  been  so  far  modified  in  States  with  the  climatic  conditions  of  Massachusetts  and 
Illinois  as  to  permit  the  diversion  of  water  for  the  purposes  of  irrigation  where  the  quantity  of  the 
stream  is  necessarily  diminished  by  at  least  the  quantity  absorbed  in  the  irrigation  of  the  land  upon 
which  it  is  put  Especially  should  this  be  so  in  California,  where  in  a  great  part  of  the  State  water  is 
its  very  lifeblood.  Every  practical  man  must  know  that,  with  the  dry  atmosphere  and  porous  soils 
of  those  sections  requiring  irrigation,  but  little,  if  any  of  the  water  diverted  and  used  in  irrigation  is  or 
can  be  returned  to  the  stream  from  which  it  is  taken.  To  establish,  therefore,  as  the  law  of  this  State, 
that  the  water  of  a  water  course  must  flow  on  in  its  natural  channel  undiminished  in  quantity  would 
in  effect  be  to  convert  the  fertile  fields,  gardens,  orchards,  and  vineyards  in  many  and  great  sections  of 
the  State  into  waste  and  desert  places.  Such  a  rule  is  inapplicable  to  the  conditions  of  things  existing 
here.  The  common  law  is  supposed  and  has  been  said  to  be  the  perfection  of  human  reason,  but  it 
would  be  the  very  reverse  of  this  to  hold  that  the  waters  of  the  streams  of  California  must  continue  to 
flow  in  their  natural  channels  until  they  sink  into  the  sand  or  waste  themselves  in  the  sea,  while 
orchards,  vineyards,  and  growing  crops  of  immense  if  not  incalculable  value  perish  from  thirst. — 
Extract  from  dissenting  opinion  of  Justice  Krskine  M.  Ross. 

If  the  decision  of  the  California  supreme  court  had  meant  what  the 
three  dissenting  justices  thought  it  meant,  it  would  have  practically  ended 
the  use  of  water  in  irrigation  so  far  as  California  is  concerned.  That  this 
result  did  not  follow  indicates  that  the  riparian  doctrine  of  California,  as 
established  in  Lux  v.  Haggin,  is  something  entirely  different  from  the 
common-law  riparian  doctrine  as  understood  elsewhere.  Not  only  do  the 
actual  conditions  of  irrigation  and  the  practices  of  irrigators  in  California 


OBSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  45 

indicate  this  difference,  but  it  is  .recognized  by  law  writers.  In  a  recent 
discussion  of  tins  subject,  lion.  John  1).  Works,  ex  justice  of  the  supreme 
court  of  California,  lias  clearly  and  cogently  portrayed  the  existing  situation. 
He  says  (the  italics  being  ours):1 

The  majority  opinion  (in  Lux  r.  Haggin  )  sustained  tin-  contention  that  the  common  law  must 
prevail,  and  that  the  court  must  not  lie  swerved  from  its  enforcement  l>y  the  plea  of  differing  conditions 
and  injurious  consequences.  But  the  court,  while  not.  overruling;  thisca.se,  has  in  numerous  subsequent 
rases  departed  from  it,  and  the  court  in  that  and  later  cases  has  done  precisely  what  it  was  then  held 
could  not  be  done:  allowed  the  necessity  for  some  different  rule  of  right,  as  between  the  riparian 
owners  themselves  and  between  them  ami  the  appropriator,  to  prevail  over  the  law  as  it  was  then 
declared  to  be. 

But,  strangely  enough,  while  the  main  question  in  that  case  was  whether  the  common-law  right 
of  a  riparian  owner  should  be  recognized  as  existing  at  all  in  this  State  or  not,  and  the  right  was 
upheld,  manifestly,  only  because  the  majority  of  the  court  felt  constrained  to  that  conclusion  by  strict 
rules  of  law,  that  and  later  cases,  or  some  of  them,  Inn',  ,.;/,/«/,•(/  tin-  ,-iijht  nf  <i  ri/mrian  owner  far 
ln'ijniiil  thul  ivxii-tl  in  him  at  common  law,  mid  ha*  thus,  in  a  measure,  if  not  entirely  subverted  and  destroyed 
the  common-law  ri/ini-iini  ri;/lit. — Pp.  11-12. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

As  the  law  of  this  Stale  stands  to-day,  the  common  law  of  riparian  rights  is  in  force.  But  those 
i-ii/litx  it ff  .in  I'liliri'li/  n/ijiiixfil  lii  thr  In-*!  iiiti'i-i'xtx  of  tin'  State  that  they  are  being  but  little  regarded  in  the 
Hi-tun/  iliftribiiHiiii  and*  use  of  water,  and  therefore  the  conclusion  of  the  supreme  court  that  they 
must  be  respected  as  existing  rights  in  this  State  has  not  been  as  harmful  as  was  at  first  anticipated. 
It  is  believed  that  one  of  the  strongest  reasons  for  this  is  that  the  owners  of  riparian  rights  have 
found  that  in  order  to  make  their  rights  of  any  value,  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  they  must  become 
appropriators  of  the  water.  And  the  supreme  court  has  practically  nullified  the  common-law  right 
to  water  by  recognizing  and  making  part  of  it  the  right  of  appropriation  for  irrigation.  The  practical 
effect  of  it  really  is  to  give  the  owner  on  the  stream  a  preferred  right  to  appropriate  so  much  of  its 
waters  as  he  may  reasonably  need  for  the  irrigation  of  his  riparian  lands. — Harris  r.  Harrison,  93 
Cal.,  676. 

And  while  the  court  has  enlarged  the  right  of  the  riparian  owner  by  allowing  the  diversion  and 
use  of  the  waters  of  the  stream  for  irrigation  it  has,  on  the  other  hand,  limited  his  right  by  holding 
that  he  can  not  complain  of  an  appropriation  of  a  part  of  the  stream  above  him  when  the  water  diverted 
would  not  be  used  by  him. — Modoc  L.  and  L.  S.  Co.  r.  Booth,  102  Cal.,  151,  156. 

But  his  injury  by  an  unlawful  diversion  can  not  be  held  to  be  inconsiderable,  because  it  is  inca- 
pable of  ascertainment  or  can  not  be  measured  in  damages. — Heilbron  v.  Canal  Co.,  75  Cal.,  426. 

This  is,  of  course,  an  infringement  upon  the  common-law  riparian  right  of  the  landowner,  which 
entitles  him  to  the  flow  of  the  entire  stream  undiminished  in  quantity.  Under  the  common-law 
doctrine,  the  question  whether  he  could  use  the  water  in  no  way  affected  or  limited  his  right.  It  was 
simply  a  giving  way  by  the  supreme  court  to  the  necessity,  growing  out  of  the  prevailing  conditions 
in  this  State,  to  curtail  the  common-law  right  of  the  riparian  owner  in  order  to  conserve  the  water  of 
the  State  and  allow  its  more  extended  use. 

But  the  very  same  thing  that  would  justify  the  court  in  enacting  and  enforcing  this  limitation  of 
the  common-law  right  would  have  justified  it  equally  in  holding,  in  the  first  instance,  that  the 
common-law  right  was  not  applicable  to  the  conditions  prevailing  in  this  State,  and  that  the  common 
law  respecting  it  was  never  in  force  here. 

The  right  of  a  riparian  owner,  as  thus  expanded  and  limited  to  suit  the  exigencies  of  the 
situation  by  the  supreme  court,  is,  according  to  the  decided  cases  in  this  State,  the  subject  of  sale  and 
transfer  by  him,  and  may  be  lost  by  grant,  condemnation,  or  prescription. — Gould  v.  Stafford,  91  Cal., 
146.  Alta  Land,  etc.,  Co.  r.  Hancock,  85  Cal.,  219.  Sprague  r.  Heard,  90  Cal.,  221. 

But  this,  again,  is  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  common-law  right  which  is  a  part  of  the  land  to 
which  it  is  annexed.  Of  course  he  could  grant  or  convey  his  right  with  the  land  of  which  it  is  a  part, 


•Works on  Irrigation,  pp.  11-25. 


46  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

but  not  otherwise,  because  when  severed  from  the  laud_it  is  no  longer  a  rijiarian  right,  but  that  right 
is  wholly  destroyed.  Therefore,  it  is  certainly  an  error  to  say  that  a  riparian  right  may  be  conveyed 
separate  from  the  land.  The  party  to  whom  the  conveyance  is  made  may  obtain  the  right  to  the  use 
of  the  water,  but  it  is  no  longer  a  riparian  right. — Pp.  23-25. 

If  the  conclusions  of  Judge  Works,  quoted  aoove,  are  correct,  and  they 
are  quoted  because  believed  to  be,  the  riparian  rights  recognized  and  estab- 
lished by  the  courts  of  California  are  a  new  creation,  since  they  have  no 
foundation  in  statute  law  and  are  not  in  accord  with  the  common  law.  As 
these  rights,  if  maintained,  will  in  time  control  the  greater  part  of  the 
water  supply  of  the  State  and  shape  the  development  and  character  of  an 
industry  on  which  the  welfare  of  generations  yet  unborn  will  depend,  it 
becomes  a  matter  of  more  than  usual  economic  interest  to  determine  defi- 
nitely their  limitations  and  character.  To  do  this  from  a  study  of  existing 
conditions  would  require  more  than  a  finite  intellect.  Among  the  contra- 
dictions and  uncertainties  which  they  present  to  students  of  the  subject, 
and  to  those  wishing  to  make  use  of  the  water  supply,  are  the  following: 

The  doctrine  of  appropriation  and  the  common-law  doctrine  of  riparian 
rights  are  direct!}-  antagonistic  and  can  not  be  reconciled,  yet  both  are  a 
part  of  the  California  irrigation  system.  One  exists  by  virtue  of  a  statute 
and  the  other  through  court  decision.  How  they  operate  together  is  illus- 
trated by  the  conditions  in  the  eight  districts  included  in  this  investigation. 
The  discussions  of  Mr.  Schuvler  of  the  situation  in  southern  California,  and 

t/ 

of  all  the  investigators  in  the  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  valleys,  portray 
the  uncertainties  and  dangers  which  now  beset  users  of  water.  These 
reports  show  that  appropriators  claim  over  100,000,000  inches,  which  is  more 
than  the  combined  discharges  of  the  streams,  and  leaves  nothing  for  the 
riparian  proprietors.  The  latter,  on  the  other  hand,  claim  a  preferred  right 
to  use,  sell,  or  lease  the  entire  flow  of  these  streams,  and  in  some  instances 
where  they  have  not  cared  to  do  either  they  have  successfully  prevented  the 
use  of  these  streams  by  others.  No  one,  whether  an  appropriator  or  riparian 
proprietor,  knows  definitely  how  much  water  he  is  entitled  to,  nor  how  soon 
he  may  have  to  defend  his  rights  in  a  long  and  costly  lawsuit. 

If  the  waters  of  California  streams  were  required  to  flow  in  their  natural 
channels  substantially  undiminished  in  quantity,  as  would  be  the  case  under 
some  definitions  of  the  common-law  doctrine,  there  would  be  no  uncer- 
tainty regarding  what  are  riparian  lands.  They  would  be  those  lands  imme- 
diately contiguous  to  the  stream.  But'  when  this  doctrine  is  so  modified 
as  to  permit  water  to  be  taken  away  from  the  stream  for  the  irrigation  of 
land  more  or  less  remote  from  the  natural  channel,  and  when  in  practice 


OBSTACLES    TO    DEVELOPMENT.  47 

streams  are  being  absorbed  by  such  diversions,  there  is  need  of  some  stand- 
ard by  which  the  location  and  area  of  riparian  lands  and  of  the  volume  of 
riparian  diversions  can  be  denned.  Are  all  irrigable  lands  to  be  regarded  as 
riparian  lands;  if  so,  where  does  the  doctrine  differ  from  the  laws  govern- 
ing appropriations  of  water?  Is  the  owner  of  a  section  of  land  having  a  few 
hundred  feet  frontage  on  a  stream  entitled  to  irrigate  the  entire  section  as 
riparian  lands;  and  if  he  disposes  of  a  quarter  section  which  does  not  touch 
the  stream  to  a  nonriparian  landowner  does  the  land  sold  cease  to  be 
riparian  land  and  lose  its  right  to  water  for  irrigation?  We  have  not  been 
able  to  find  any  decision  which  specifically  answers  these  inquiries. 

A  riparian  proprietor  in  California  has  been  held  to  possess  a  right  in 
the  stream  which  he  can  sell,  rent,  or  lease.1  In  the  absence  of  a  definite 
determination  of  the  volume  of  water  to  which  each  riparian  proprietor  is 
entitled  the  volume  sold  depends  largely  on  the  demand  for  water  and  the 
price  which  will  be  paid  for  it.  In  some  cases  rights  are  asserted  to  water 
enough  to  irrigate  all  the  lands  owned  by  the  riparian  proprietor  and,  in 
addition,  to  all  the  water  that  he  can  dispose  of  to  his  nonriparian  neighbors. 

These  investigations  have  shown  that  riparian  proprietors  have  not  only 
claimed  a  right  to  take  water  for  nonriparian  lands,  but  also  to  exercise  this 
right  in  a  wholly  arbitrary  fashion.  The  report  of  Mr.  Wilson  (p.  174)  serves 
to  show  how  water  is  furnished  or  withheld  at  the  will  or  caprice  of  riparian 
proprietors. 

In  California  riparian  rights  may  be  disposed  of  by  sale.  This  is  dif- 
ferent from  the  disposal  of  water  before  referred  to.  As  Judge  Works  has 
stated,  the  purchaser  of  a  right  does  not  hold  it  as  a  riparian  proprietor. 
The  sale  entirely  changes  its  character.  So  far  as  we  are  able  to  determine, 
the  purchaser  of  such  a  right  would  hold  it  as  a  purely  speculative  prop- 
erty. By  extending  his  purchases  he  could  acquire  the  absolute  control  of 
the  entire  waters  of  a  river.  And  it  is  the  assertion  of  a  right  of  this  char- 
acter that  forms  the  basis  of  the  principal  controversy  discussed  in  the  report 
of  Mr.  Wilson. 

Wherever  a  riparian  proprietor  objects  to  the  use  of  water  above  him, 
only  litigation  can  determine  whether  or  not  his  objection  is  justified.  A 
speculative  purchaser  can,  by  the  purchase  of  the  rights  of  the  riparian 
proprietors,  acquire  such  control  of  a  stream  as  to  be  a  menace  to  actual 
users,  even  if  he  does  not  levy  tribute  upon  them.  The  justices  who  con- 
sidered this  matter  in  Lux  v.  Haggin  were  confronted  by  the  fact  that 


1  Gould  r.  Stafford  (91  Cal.,  146) ;  Sprague  e.  Heard  (90  Cal.,  221);  Swift  v.  Goodrich  (70  Cal.,  103). 


48  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

appropriate!*  were  claiming  all  the  water  in  the  State,  not  because  they 
needed  it  or  intended  to  use  it,  but  because  they  proposed  to  rent  or  sell  it 
to  users.  That  they  regarded  the  abuse  of  appropriations  as  serious  an  evil 
as  the  restriction  of  the  riparian  doctrine  seems  clear  from  the  following 
extract  from  the  decision: 

If  the  law  is  settled,  we  can  not  override  the  established  rule  to  secure  some  conjectural  advantage 
to  a  greater  number.  If,  however,  we  were  permitted  to  do  this,  the  inquiry  would  still  remain 
whether  the  recognition  of  a  doctrine  of  appropriation  (such  as  is  contended  for  by  respondent)  would 
secure  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number.  Observe,  if  that  be  the  true  rule,  the  appropriator 
does  not  necessarily  act  as  the  agent  of  the  State,  employing  the  power  of  eminent  domain  for  the 
benefit  of  the  public,  but  by  his  appropriation  makes  the  running  water  his  own,  subject  only  to  the 
trust  that  he  shall  employ  it  for  some  useful  purpose.  It  would  hardly  be  contended  that  while  he 
continues  to  use  it  for  a  useful  purpose  a  statute  would  be  valid  which  should  take  it  from  him  without 
indemnification  under  a  pretext  of  regulating  the  "common  use"  of  the  water  more  profitably  or  of 
providing  for  its  distribution  so  as  to  benefit  a  greater  number  of  persons.  He  would  have  a  vested 
right  to  the  use  of  the  water,  although  the  riparian  proprietors  would  have  none.  If,  indeed,  one  who 
has  appropriated  the  water  of  a  stream  since  the  adoption  of  the  present  constitution  has  appropriated 
it  "for  sale,  rental,  or  distribution "  to  others,  the  rates  he  may  charge  consumers  must  be  fixed  by 
local  authority.  (Const.,  art.  14,  sec.  1.)  But  if  he  shall  consume  the  water  himself,  one  may  thus, 
for  his  own  benefit,  arbitrarily  deprive  many  of  an  advantage  which,  whether  technically  private 
property  or  not,  is  of  great  value,  and  thus  secure  to  himself  that  which  by  every  definition  is  a  species 
of  private  property  in  him.  Riparian  lands  are  irrigated  naturally  by  the  waters  percolating  through 
the  soil  and  dissolving  its  fertilizing  properties.  This  is  sufficiently  apparent  from  the  consequent •- 
which  ordinarily  follow  from  a  continual  cessation  of  the  flow  of  a  stream.  If,  in  accordance  with  the 
law,  such  lands  may  be  deprived  of  the  natural  irrigation  without  compensation  to  the  owners,  we 
must  so  hold;  but  we  fail  to  discover  the  principles  of  "public  policy,"  which  are  of  themselves  of 
paramount  authority,  and  demand  that  the  law  shall  be  so  declared.  In  our  opinion  it  does  not  require 
a  prophetic  vision  to  anticipate  that  the  adoption  of  the  rule,  so  called,  of  "appropriation"  would 
result  in  time  in  a  monopoly  of  all  the  waters  of  the  State  by  comparatively  few  individuals,  or  combi- 
nations of  individuals  controlling  aggregated  capital,  who  could  either  apply  the  water  to  purposes 
useful  to  themselves,  or  sell  it  to  those  from  whom  they  had  taken  it  away,  as  well  as  to  others. 
Whether  the  fact  that  the  power  of  fixing  rates  would  be  in  the  supervisors,  etc.,  would  be  a  sufficient 
guaranty  against  overcharges  would  remain  to  be  tested  by  experience.  Whatever  the  rule  laid  down, 
a  monopoly  or  concentration  of  the  waters  in  a  few  hands  may  occur  in  the  future.  But  surely  it  is 
not  requiring  too  much  to  demand  that  the  owners  of  lands  shall  be  compensated  for  the  natural 
advantages  of  which  they  are  to  be  deprived.  (69  Cal.,  308-310.) 

The  fear  above  expressed  is  believed  to  be  well  founded.  The  estab- 
lishment of  riparian  rights  does  not,  however,  provide  a  remedy.  To  do 
that  water  should  be  attached  to  all  the  lands  on  which  used,  instead  of 
simply  those  lands  past  which  it  flows.  The  germ  of  natural  justice  is  iu 
the  riparian  doctrine,  but  in  arid  lands  it  needs  to  be  expanded  to  permit  of 
the  largest  use  of  the  stream. 

Giving  to  the  lands  abutting  tne  river  control  of  its  waters  when  the 
necessity  for  irrigation  extends  to  all  the  lands  in  its  valley  involves  a 
complete  disregard  of  climatic  necessities,  and  is  not  warranted  by  any 
element  of  natural  justice.  The  water  which  fills  the  stream  does  not  come 
from  lauds  owned  by  riparian  proprietors.  Its  storehouse  is  the  distant 


RIPARIAN    RIGHTS    IN    ENGLISH    COLON  IKS.  49 

mountains.  The  snows  and  rains  fall  as  a  rule  on  public  land,  and  are  as 
much  the  property  of  the  nonriparian  as  of  the  riparian  landowner.  They 
belong  also  to  the  Government,  which  has  no  direct  interest  in  either  class 
of  lands,  but  which  is  vitally  concerned  in  securing  the  largest  and  best  use 
of  the  State's  resources.  The  preservation  of  the  forests  upon  which  the 
perennial  character  of  the  water  supply  depends  is  not  looked  after  by  the 
riparian  proprietors  alone.  It  would  be  an  incalculable  gain  to  the  State  if 
all  the  rights  to  water  could  be  measured  by  the  same  test — that  of  actual 
beneficial  use.  But  if  this  can  not  be  done  then  riparian  rights  should  be 
made  inseparable  from  riparian  lands.  If  it  is  good  law  and  good  policy 
to  give  the  present  owner  of  riparian  lands  a  right  in  the  stream  bordering 
his  land,  it  is  equally  good  law  and  good  policy  to  protect  the  man  who  may 
own  the  same  land  fifty  years  hence  in  the  same  right  This  can  not  be 
done  if  riparian  rights  are  held  to  be  transferable.  The  recognition  of  the 
power  to  sell  these  rights  is  contrary  to  the  teachings  of  experience  in 
either  arid  or  humid  countries.  These  sales  in  California  have  already 
helped  to  create  monopolies  in  water,  and  made  it  an  instrument  of  specula- 
tive extortion  not  permitted  by  the  worst  of  the  State  laws  where  rights  are 
acquired  by  appropriation  alone.  In  any  event  every  individual  right  should 
be  defined  in  some  way,  and  its  volume,  or  the  land  to  which  it  attaches, 
determined  by  some  systematic  procedure,  so  that  on  every  stream  those 
interested  may  know  how  much  of  the  water  supply  is  controlled  and  how 
much  remains  to  be  acquired  by  others.  It  would  seem  that  a  statute  to 
provide  for  this  could  be  enacted,  which  would  be  at  least  as  effective  as  the 
slow  evolution  of  a  doctrine  by  piecemeal  tlirough  court  decisions.  The 
subject  is  of  so  much  importance,  and  there  exists  such  wide  difference  of 
opinion  among  those  interested  regarding  what  can  be  done  and  what  should 
be  done,  that  some  of  the  legislation  of  other  irrigated  lands  whose  laws  are 
borrowed  from  England  are  given  below. 

LEGISLATION  RESPECTING  RIPARIAN  RIGHTS  IN  ENGLISH  COLONIES. 

CANADA. 

Before  any  irrigation  legislation  whatever  was  enacted  the  Canadian 
government  sent  a  commissioner  to  the  western  part  of  the  United  States  to 
make  a  study  of  our  laws.  Upon  his  return  this  commissioner  presented  a 
report,  in  which  the  first  suggestion  was: 

First.  The  total  suppression  of  all  riparian  rights  in  water,  so  that  the  same,  being  vested  in  the 
Crown,  may  he  distributed  under  well-considered  government  control  for  the  benefit  of  the  greatest 
possible  number. 

23856— No.  100—01 ± 


50  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  Northwest  irrigation  act1  was  formed  in  accordance  with  the  recom- 
mendations of  this  report.  The  sections  of  that  act,  as  amended  in  1898, 
referring  to  riparian  rights  are  as  follows: 

SBC.  4.  The  property  in  and  the  right  to  the  use  of  all  the  water  at  any  time  in  an}'  river,  stream, 
water  course,  lake,  creek,  ravine,  can  yon,  lagoon,  swamp,  marsh,  or  other  body  of  water  shall,  for  the 
purposes  of  this  act,  be  deemed  to  be  vested  in  the  Crown,  unless  and  until  and  except  only  so  far  as 
some  right  therein,  or  to  the  use  thereof,  inconsistent  with  the  right  of  the  Crown,  and  which  is  not  a 
public'  right  or  a  right  common  to  the  public,  is  established;  and,  save  in  the  exercise  of  any  legal  right 
existing  at  the  time  of  such  diversion  or  use,  no  person  shall  divert  or  use  any  water  from  any  river, 
stream,  water  course,  lake,  creek,  ravine,  canyon,  lagoon,  swamp,  marsh,  or  other  body  of  water 
otherwise  than  under  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

SEC.  6.  After  the  passing  of  this  act  no  right  to  the  permanent  diversion  or  to  the  exclusive  use  of 
the  water  in  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  creek,  ravine,  canyon,  lagoon,  swamp,  marsh,  or 
other  body  of  water  shall  be  acquired  by  any  riparian  owner  or  any  other  person,  by  length  of  use  or 
otherwise  than  as  it  may  be  acquired  or  conferred  under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  unless  it  is  acquired 
by  a  grant  made  in  pursuance  of  some  agreement  or  undertaking  existing  at  the  time  of  the  passing  of 
this  act. 

SEC.  8.  Any  water,  the  property  of  which  is  vested  in  the  Crown,  may  be  acquired  for  domestic. 
irrigation,  or  other  purposes  upon  application  therefor  as  hereinafter  provided;  and  all  applications 
made  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  have  precedence,  except  application  under 
section  7,  according  to  the  date  of  filing  them  with  the  commissioner. 

2.  The  purposes  for  which  the  right  to  water  may  be  acquired  are  of  three  classes,  namely:  First, 
domestic  purposes,  which  shall  be  taken  to  mean  household  and  sanitary  purposes  and  the  watering  of 
stock,  and  all  purposes  connected  with  the  working  of  railways  or  factories  by  steam,  but  shall  not 
include  the  sale  or  barter  of  water  for  such  purposes;  second,  irrigation  purposes;  and  third,  other 
purposes. 

SEC.  9.  No  application  for  any  purpose  shall  be  granted  where  the  proposed  use  of  the  water  would 
deprive  any  person  owning  land  adjoining  the  river,  stream,  lake,  or  other  source  of  supply  of  whatever 
water  he  requires  for  domestic  purposes. 

Speaking  of  the  abolition  of  riparian  rights,  Mr.  J.  S.  Dennis,  the  com- 
missioner who  visited  the  United  States,  says:2 

In  the  Northwest  Territories  the  land,  with  the  exception  of  that  which  has  been  granted  as 
subsidies  to  railway  companies  or  alienated  through  homestead  or  preemption  grants,  sales,  etc.,  all 
belongs  to  the  Crown,  and  title  to  any  of  the  water  in  streams,  lakes,  springs,  or  other  natural  channels 
had  only  passed  from  the  Crown  in  so  far  as  the  rights  of  riparian  owners  were  concerned,  so  the 
conditions  were  particularly  favorable  for  the  inauguration  of  a  law  regarding  the  diversion  and  use  of 
the  water  supply  for  irrigation. 

The  investigations  into  this  subject  had  led  to  the  conclusion  that  the  foundation  provision 
necessary  in  an  act  of  this  kind  was  that  riparian  rights  should  be  abolished,  and  the  Government 
given  a  free  hand  to  apportion  or  distribute  the  water  and  control  its  use  in  such  a  way  that  the 
greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number  would  result  therefrom. 

The  abolition  of  riparian  rights  and  vesting  the  absolute  control  of  all  water  in  one  strong  central 
authority  are  the  important  provisions  in  the  act.  In  many  of  the  States  in  the  United  States  riparian 
rights  have  been  abolished,  and  title  to  the  water  vested  in  the  commonwealth;  but  there  the  vacant 
lands  belong  to  the  Federal  Government,  and  it  is  impossible  to  so  combine  the  land  and  water,  owing 
to  this  divided  authority,  as  to  secure  the  most  beneficial  results  therefrom. 

The  provisions  of  our  act  on  the  subject  of  riparian  rights  will  doubtless  have  to  undergo  the  test 
of  litigation,  but  assuming  that  the  decision  of  the  courts  will  be  in  favor  of  the  act,  there  is  no  doubt 


1 58-59  Vic.,  chap.  33.     See  also  Bulletin  96,  Irrigation  Laws  Northwest  Territories  Canada,  Office 
of  Experiment  Stations,  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture. 

2  General  Report  on  Irrigation  and  Canadian  Irrigation  Surveys,  1894,  pp.  26-27. 


RIPARIAN    RIGHTS    IN    ENGLISH    COLONIES.  51 

that  the  one  central  authority,  being  vested  with  ownership  and  control  of  both  the  land  and  the 
water,  should  make  it  possible  to  so  administer  the  two  as  to  secure  the  greatest  possible  benefit  to  the 
greatest  number. 

PROVINCE    OF   VICTORIA,    AUSTRALIA. 

Riparian  rights  were  abrogated  in  Victoria  by  the  "irrigation  act  of 
1886."  The  interpretation  of  the  common-law  rights  which  had  vested  in 
riparian  owners  prior  to  that  time  is  set  forth  in  the  following  extracts  from 
opinions  rendered  in  1888: 

By  the  general  law  applicable  to  running  streams  every  riparian  proprietor  has  a  right  to  what 
may  be  called  the  ordinary  use  of  the  water  for  his  domestic  purposes  and  for  Ms  cattle,  and  this 
without  regard  to  the  effect  which  such  use  may  have  in  case  of  a  deficiency  upon  proprietors  lower 
down  the  stream.  But  further,  he  has  a  right  to  the  use  of  it  for  any  purpose,  or  what  may  be 
deemed  the  extraordinary  use  of  it,  provided  he  does  not  thereby  interfere  with  the  rights  of  the 
proprietors  either  above  or  below  him.  Subject  to  this  condition  he  may  dam  up  the  stream  for  the 
purpose  of  a  mill  or  divert  the  water  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation.  But  he  has  no  right  to  interrupt 
the  regular  flow  of  the  stream  if  he  thereby  interferes  with  the  lawful  use  of  the  water  by  any  other 
proprietors  and  inflicts  upon  them  a  sensible  injury.  (Miner  v.  Gilmour,  12  Moore  P.  C.) 

A  riparian  proprietor  has  the  right  to  use  all  water  which  he  requires  for  domestic  use  and  to 
water  his  cattle,  and  is  also  entitled  to  take  from  the  river  for  any  other  purpose  any  quantity  of  water 
which  will  still  leave  in  the  river  a  sufficiency  of  water  to  substantially  enable  other  riparian  owners 
lower  down  the  stream  to  exercise  similar  rights.  This  riparian  right  is  still  preserved  by  the  act  No. 
898  (irrigation  act  of  1886),  as  to  persons  who  had  such  a  right  at  the  passing  of  the  act.  (John  Mad- 
den, Crown  solicitor,  in  answer  to  inquiry  from  secretary  of  mines  and  water  supply. ) 

In  1899  the  following  act  relating  to  riparian  rights  was  passed: 

A  BILL  to  declare  and  amend  the  laws  relating  to  riparian  rights. 

Whereas  it  is  advisable  to  define  what  are  the  special  rights  in  the  waters  of  rivers,  streams, 
water  courses,  lakes,  lagoons,  swamps,  or  marshes  appertaining  to  the  ownership  of  lands  abutting 
thereon,  and  to  amend  the  law  relating  to  such  rights:  Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  Queen's  Most 
Excellent  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  legislative  council  and  the  legislative 
assembly  of  Victoria  in  this  present  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same  as  follows 
(that  is  to  say) : 

( 1 )  This  act  may  be  cited  as  the  riparian  rights  act  1899,  and  shall  be  read  and  construed  as  one 
with  the  water  act  1890  (hereinafter  called  the  principal  act). 

(2)  This  act  and  the  principal  act,  and  any  act  amending  the  same,  may  be  cited  together  as  the 
water  acts. 

Sections  three  and  one  hundred  and  fifty-three  of  the  water  act  of  1890  are  hereby  repealed. 

Every  owner  of  land  alienated  from  the  Crown  before  the  fifteenth  day  of  December,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  eighty-six,  abutting  on  a  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh, 
there  being  no  reserve  between  such  land  and  the  bank,  shall  have  a  right  to  the  use  of  the  water  in 
the  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh  for  the  ordinary  and  domestic  use  of 
himself  and  of  his  family  and  servants,  and  for  the  use  of  his  cattle  permanently  depasturing  on  such 
lands. 

Every  such  owner  shall  likewise  have  the  right  to  take  and  divert  water  from  such  river,  stream, 
water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh  for  other  uses  on  his  riparian  lands,  provided  such  uses 
have  been  bona  fide  habitually  exercised  by  such  owner  for  not  less  than  twenty  years  prior  to  the 
passing  of  the  irrigation  act  of  1886. 

A  right  to  the  permanent  diversion  or  to  the  exclusive  use  or  to  any  other  than  the  ordinary  and 
domestic  use  and  the  use  of  cattle  of  the  water  in  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp, 
or  marsh  attaching  to  the  ownership  of  any  riparian  lands  by  length  of  use  or  otherwise  than  under 
the  provisions  of  some  act  of  Parliament  shall  attach  only  to  the  riparian  allotment  as  originally  sold 
by  the  Crown  and  not  to  any  other  lands  of  the  same  owner.  It  shall  not  attach  to  any  lands  separated 


52  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN   CALIFORNIA. 

from  the  riparian  lands  by  an  allotment  boundary  or  by  a  public  road,  or  to  any  land  distant  more 
than  one  mile  from  the  bank  (ripa)  in  respect  of  which  the  right  accrues. 

Any  owner  of  land  alienated  from  the  Crown  before  the  said  fifteenth  day  of  December,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighty-six,  claiming  to  have  the  right  to  take  and  divert  water  from  any 
river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh,  being  in  or  flowing  through  or  abutting 
upon  such  lands  for  use  thereon  other  than  the  ordinary  and  domestic  use  of  himself  and  his  family 
and  servants,  and  of  his  cattle  permanently  depasturing  on  such  lands,  on  the  ground  of  his  having 
exercised  such  use  for  not  less  than  twenty  years  prior  to  the  passing  of  this  act,  shall  register  his  claim 
to  such  right  within  twelve  months  from  the  passing  of  this  act. 

It  shall  be  competent  for  the  Crown  or  for  any  landowner  or  for  anybody  or  person  to  challenge 
such  claim  and  to  have  an  issue  tried  at  law  to  settle  the  same. 

All  claims  not  registered  within  twelve  months  shall  absolutely  lapse. 

Sections  will  be  required  to  define  the  form  and  mode  of  making  the  statement  of  claim  of  any 
right  to  take  and  divert  water  from  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh, 
for  uses  other  than  ordinary  and  domestic  use  and  the  vise  of  cattle,  and  to  define  the  authority  to 
receive  such  claims  and  to  register  them  or  to  refuse  registration  and  to  provide  for  an  appeal  and  the 
trial  of  an  issue  in  case  of  such  refusal  and  the  nonacquiescence  of  the  claimant  therein. 

Except  as  hereinbefore  expressly  provided,  the  water  at  any  time  in  any  river,  stream,  water 
course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh  shall  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  declared  to  be  absolutely  the 
property  of  the  Crown  and  inalienable,  and  the  right  to  the  use  of  all  such  water  shall  in  every  case 
be  deemed  to  be  vested  in  the  Crown. 

Where  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh  forms  the  boundary  of  an 
allotment  of  land  alienated  by  the  Crown,  the  bed  and  banks  thereof  shall  be  deemed  to  have  remained 
in  the  Crown  and  not  to  have  passed  to  the  landowner. 

Except  as  hereinbefore  expressly  provided,  or  except  under  the  provisions  of  some  act  of  Parlia- 
ment, no  person  shall  divert  or  appropriate  any  water  from  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake, 
lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh  except  in  the  exercise  of  the  general  right  of  all  persons  to  use  water  for 
domestic  and  ordinary  use  and  for  the  use  of  cattle  from  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon, 
swamp,  or  marsh  vested  in  the  Crown  and  to  which  there  is  access  by  a  public  road  or  reserve. 

After  the  passing  of  this  act  no  right  to  the  permanent  diversion  or  to  the  exclusive  use  of  the 
water  in  any  river,  stream,  water  course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh,  and  no  right  to  take  and 
divert  such  water  for  use  on  any  riparian  land  other  than  the  ordinary  and  domestic  use  of  the  owner 
and  of  his  family  and  servants  and  of  his  cattle  permanently  depasturing  thereon  shall  be  acquired  by 
any  riparian  owner  or  any  other  person  by  length  of  use  or  otherwise  than  as  the  same  may  be  acquired 
or  conferred  under  the  provisions  of  some  act  of  Parliament.  And  no  such  right  shall  be  deemed  to 
have  been  acquired  otherwise  than  as  aforesaid  since  the  passing  of  the  irrigation  act  1886,  notwith- 
standing 'the  repeal  of  the  said  act. 

A  provision  to  entitle  the  Crown,  by  the  minister  of  water-supply  or  his  officers,  to  interfere 
summarily  to  prevent  the  undue,  excessive  or  illegal  diversion  of  water  from  any  river,  stream,  water 
course,  lake,  lagoon,  swamp,  or  marsh,  and  to  lay  on  the  person  or  body  diverting,  whether  private 
landowner,  trust,  or  other  body  or  person,  the  onus  of  appealing  against  such  interference  and  not  on 
the  Crown  the  onus  of  applying  for  an  injunction  or  other  process  to  restrain  it  or  him. 

PROVINCE   OF    NEW   SOUTH   WALES,  AUSTRALIA. 

Water-rights  act  of  1896. 

Whereas  it  is  desirable  in  the  public  interest  to  declare  the  respective  rights  of  the  Crown  and  of 
riparian  proprietors  to  the  waters  of  rivers  and  lakes,  and  to  make  better  provision  for  the  conserva- 
tion and  supply  of  water  and  for  regulating  drainage:  Be  it  therefore  enacted  by  the  Queen's  Most 
Excellent  Majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  legislative  council  and  legislative 
assembly  of  New  South  Wales  in  Parliament  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  as  follows: 

Rights  of  Crown  and  of  riparian  proprietors. 

1.  (I)  The  right  to  the  use  and  flow  and  to  the  control  of  the  water  in  all  rivers  and  lakes  which 
flow  through  or  past  or  are  situated  within  the  land  of  two  or  more  occupiers,  and  of  the  water  con- 
tained in  or  conserved  by  any  works  to  which  this  act  extends,  shall,  subject  only  to  the  restrictions 


STATE    CONTROL    OF    STREAMS.  53 

hereinafter  mentioned,  vest  in  the  Crown.  And  in  the  exercise  of  that  right  the  Crown,  by  its  officers 
mid  servants,  may  enter  any  land  and  take  such  measures  as  may  be  thought  fit  or  as  may  be  prescribed 
for  the  conservation  and  supply  of  such  water  as  aforesaid,  and  its  more  equal  distribution  and 
beneficial  use  and  its  protection  from  pollution,  and  for  preventing  the  unauthorized  obstruction  of 
rivers.  For  the  purposes  of  this  subsection  "occupier"  includes  the  Crown. 

(II)  The  said  right  shall  be  subject  to  the  following  restrictions: 

(a)  It  shall  not  lie  exercised  in  contravention  of  any  right  conferred  on  and  lawfully  exercisable 
by  any  person,  company,  corporation,  or  board  by  or  under  the  authority  of  any  act  dealing  with 
mining,  or  of  any  public  or  private  statute  or  of  any  license  granted  by  the  Crown. 

(6)  It  shall  be  subject  to  the  rights- of  the  occupiers  of  land  on  the  banks  of  rivers  or  lakes  as 
hereinafter  defined. 

(c)  It  shall  be  subject  to  the  rights  of  the  holders  of  licenses  under  this  act. 

2.  The  occupier  of  land  on  the  bank  of  a  river  or  lake  shall  have  the  right  to  use  the  water  then 
being  in  the  river  or  lake  for  domestic  purposes,  and  for  watering  cattle  or  other  stock,  or  for  gardens 
not  exceeding  five  acres  in  extent  used  in  connection  with  a  dwelling  house,  and  it  shall  not  be 
necessary  for  the  occupier  to  apply  for  or  obtain  a  license  for  any  work  used  solely  in  respect  of  that 
right. 

10.  The  license,  if  granted,  shall  in  every  case  except  Class  IV  be  granted  for  a  period  not 
exceeding  ten  years,  and  shall  (subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  act,  with  regard  to  the  renewal  of 
licenses  and  subject  to  such  limitations  and  condition  as  the  minister  may  think  fit  to  make)  be 
renewed  by  the  minister  from  time  to  time  on  the  application  of  the  person  holding  the  license,  on  the 
payment  of  a  fee  calculated  in  the  manner  and  according  to  the  scale  set  forth  in  the  schedule  to  this 
act:  Provided,  That  no  renewal  shall  be  for  a  longer  period  than  ten  years. 

13.  A  license  shall  be  deemed  to  be  held  by  and  shall  operate  and  inure  for  the  benefit  of  the 
lawful  occupier  for  the  time  being  of  the  land  whereon  the  work  is  constructed  or  is  proposed  to  be 
constructed. 

NEED  OF  ADEQUATE  STATE  CONTROL  OF  STREAMS. 

Typical  homes,  gardens,  and  orange  groves  of  southern  California  are 
reproduced  in  illustrations  of  this  report.  They  show  the  beautiful  land- 
scapes which  irrigation  has  created  and  is  destined  to  create.  With  other 
illustrations  they  serve  to  show  the  skill  and  success  with  which  water  is 
used,  and  Mr.  Schuyler's  report  gives  some  remarkable  examples  of  efficiency 
in  distribution  and  high  duty.  The  men  who  are  displaying  such  skill  and 
industry  deserve  well  of  the  State.  They  ought  not  to  have  to  work  in  this 
manner  and  watch  for  the  sheriff  at  the  same  time,  or  to  be  compelled  to 
leave  their  work  to  seek  the  sheriff's  aid.  This  they  sometimes  have  to  do 
in  California.  In  reply  to  an  inquiry  as  to  how  he  obtained  his  share  of  a 
stream,  one  gentleman  said  he  first  got  a  court  decree,  and  then  shipped  in 
two  men  from  Arizona  who  were  handy  with  a  gun.  As  a  rule,  irrigators 
and  ditch  owners  are  law  abiding.  Their  dependence  on  the  law  and 
respect  for  it  as  a  relief  from  worse  conditions  is  often  pathetic  in  the  light 
of  what  it  fails  to  do.  Sometimes,  however,  exasperated  and  indignant 
appropriators  from  below  make  raids  on  the  headgates  and  dams  above, 
and  scenes  of  lawlessness,  loss,  and  violence  are  the  result.  The  possibility 
of  this  is  such  that  many  irrigation  contracts  stipulate  that,  water  will  be 
furnished  if  its  delivery  is  not  prevented  by  "unlawful  invasion  or 


54  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

unwarranted  interruption,"  which  means  that  they  will  continue  to  divert 
the  stream  until  some  rival  appropriator  blows  up  their  dam.  This 
stipulation  against  probable  violence  has  never  been  noticed  in  water 
contracts  outside  of  California.  In  Colorado,  Wyoming,  Nebraska,  and 
Idaho,  there  is  no  further  need  of  resorting  to  force  because  an  appeal  can 
be  made  to  the  State  by  anyone  who  thinks  his  rights  are  being  encroached 
upon.  The  water  commissioner  in  these  States  takes  the  place  of  the  gen- 
tlemen from  Arizona  or  of  the  mob.  The  result  is  peace  and  good  will 
among  neighbors  and  order  and  economy  in  the  use  of  water.  California 
needs  the  water  commissioner  as  much  as  either  of  these  States.  Once 
tried,  his  services  will  never  be  dispensed  with. 

California  also  needs  a  law  which  will  stop  all  further  claims  to  water 
where  the  entire  supply  is  now  appropriated.  Every  ditch  which  can  not 
be  filled,  every  pump  which  can  not  be  operated,  every  acre  of  laud  pre- 
pared for  irrigation  which  is  in  excess  of  what  the  stream  will  serve,  means 
either  a  loss  of  the  money  invested  or  the  robbing  of  an  earlier  user;  some- 
times it  means  both.  So  long  as  the  right  to  make  new  appropriations  is 
unrestricted,  so  long  will  old  rights  be  insecure. 

Already  disputes  over  the  surface  flow  have  extended  to  underground 
waters.  Men  cut  off  from  the  supply  by  surface  ditches  build  galleries  to 
drain  it  oif  through  the  ground,  and  call  it  developing  water.  Sometimes 
it  is  developing  water  and  sometimes  it  is  stealing  it.  Men  who  can  not 
get  artesian  supplies  tap  and  lessen  these  supplies  with  pumps.  Upland 
wells  are  drained  by  lowland  wells.  Pipe  lines  in  one  orchard  are  empty 
because  those  in  another  are  full.  On  one  section  inspected  orange  trees 
were  dying  for  lack  of  water,  _on  an  adjoining  one  new  groves  were  being 
planted,  and  the  processes  of  appropriation  and  disappropriation  were  going 
on  almost  side  by  side. 

The  advantages  of  public  control  which  would  restrict  the  construction 
of  additional  works  until  it  had  been  demonstrated  that  there  was  water 
for  their  use  and  provide  for  a  just  division  among  the  works  already  in 
existence  seemed  so  obvious  that  I  sought  from  those  directly  interested  an 
explanation  of  why  an  attempt  had  not  been  made  to  secure  it.  The  reply 
in  every  case  was  practically  the  same.  All  classes  of  water  users  and 
water  claimants  united  in  saying  the  State  government  did  not  offer  any 
prospect  of  remedy  and  that  they  could  not  afford  to  take  any  chances  but 
preferred  to  come  to  an  agreement  among  themselves. 

It  is  not  believed  that  this  fear  is  well  founded.  It  would  take  remark- 
ably corrupt  officials  to  create  evils  equal  to  those  now  existing.  The 


STATE    CONTROL    OF    STREAMS.  55 

notion  that  we  must  have  human  nature  reformed  and  all  the  State  machin- 
ery perfected  before  anything1  is  done  toward  the  regulation  of  streams  is 
certainly  erroneous.  That  any  sort  of  system  will  remedy  all  these  evils, 
or  entirely  avert  controversies,  is  not  expected.  No  matter  how  efficient  a 
code  of  laws  may  be  devised,  or  how  honest  and  efficient  their  administra- 
tion, there  is  certain  to  be  friction  because  of  the  conflicting  views  created 
by  the  unfortunate  absence  of  definite  control  in  the  past. 

When  Wyoming  was  admitted  to  statehood  the  water-right  situation 
did  not  differ  greatly  from  that  of  California.  The  records  were  scattered 
in  the  various  counties;  the  claims  were  as  extravagant,  indefinite,  and 
valueless  as  those  compiled  in  this  investigation.  The  Wyoming  irrigation 
law  of  1890  created  a  special  tribunal  called  the  board  of  control,  of  which 
the  State  engineer  was  made  ex  officio  president,  and  intrusted,  it  with  the 
settlement  of  existing  rights  and  the  disposal  of  all  unappropriated  water. 
The  board  began  with  a  river  where  controversies  were  acute  and  where 
appropriatora  were  at  war  with  each  other.  The  river  had  not  for  several 
years  supplied  the  needs  of  irrigators;  hence  no  extravagant  or  speculative 
rights  could  be  recognized  without  depriving  late  appropriators  of  their 
already  scanty  supply.  At  the  outset  the  board  determined  to  base  all 
rights  to  streams  on  two  principles:  Actual  use  was  to  be  the  basis  of  all 
rights  and  the  water  was  to  be  attached  to  the  land  rather  than  to  ditches 

O 

or  ditch  owners.  In  doing  this  it  placed  itself  squarely  in  opposition  to  the 
doctrine  which  was  most  strenuously  advocated  and  which  was  that  appro- 
priators had  a  vested  right  to  the  volume  claimed  in  their  recorded  notices 
of  appropriation,  whether  or  not  this  volume  had  been  used.  In  order  to 
maintain  its  position  the  board  had  not  only  to  know  how  and  where  water 
was  being  used,  but  to  be  able  to  show  to  all  those  affected  by  its  decisions 
the  source  and  accuracy  of  its  information.  The  problem  was  not  simply  to 
satisfy  its  members  that  its  decisions  were  lawful  and  right,  but  to  convince 
appropriators  that  its  policy  was  both  just  and  wise.  This  required  first  of 
all  a  careful  examination  of  the  physical  conditions  along  the  stream.  Each 
ditch  diverting  water  was  surveyed  and  its  capacity  measured.  The  area 
of  the  land  it  irrigated  was  determined,  the  flow  of  the  river  was  gaged 
from  time  to  time  during  the  season,  and  records  kept  of  the  ditches 
which  diverted  this  water.  When  these  field  investigations  were  completed 
maps  and  tables  were  prepared  which  showed  the  location  and  size  of 
ditches,  the  land  irrigated,  and  the  measured  flow  of  the  stream.  Equipped 
with  this  information,  the  board  was  prepared  to  pass  intelligently  on  the 
claims  of  appropriators.  The  preparation  and  submission  of  their  proofs 


56  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

was  made  simple  by  the  use  of  a  blank  form  which  was  in  part  copied  after 
the  desert  proofs  used  in  the  United  States  land  offices,  and  which  enabled 
appropriators  to  state  definitely,  but  briefly,  the  date  when  the  ditch  was 
built  and  the  successive  dates  when  the  area  irrigated  was  extended.  Main- 
were  able  to  prepare  their  proofs  without  any  advice  or  assistance  and 
without  incurring  any  expense,  as  the  surveys,  maps,  etc.,  were  all  paid  for 
by  the  State.  Later  on,  when  the  State  law  was  better  understood,  it  was 
rare  that  these  proofs  contained  either  inaccuracies  or  misstatements,  but  at 
the  outset  some  of  the  proofs  submitted  were  curiosities.  As  it  was  known 
that  the  amount  of  the  appropriation  would  be  fixed  by  the  acreage  of  land 
which  had  been  irrigated,  some  of  the  claimants  with  expansive  ideas  included 
in  their  descriptions  lands  which  were  many  miles  away  from  and  hundreds 
of  feet  above  their  ditches.  Without  the  preliminary  survey  some  of  these 
proofs  might  have  been  accepted,  but  with  the  official  map  before  it  the 
board  rarely  failed  to  notice  the  discrepancies  between  the  sworn  statements 
and  the  actual  situation.  It  required  tact,  firmness,  and  patience  to  have 
these  attempts  to  secure  excessive  amounts  of  water  rectified  and  prevent  a 
rebellion  against  a  rigid  adherence  to  facts  which  was  in  striking  contrast  to 
the  slipshod  methods  that  had  hitherto  prevailed.  It  was  made  manifest, 
however,  that  the  board  always  stood  ready  to  correct  its  maps  or  measure- 
ments if  they  were  shown  to  be  in  error,  but  until  this  was  shown  no  variation 
between  them  and  the  proofs  would  be  permitted.  A  few  test  surveys  were 
made,  but  fortunately  the  official  maps  proved  to  be  correct.  Of  late  years 
their  accuracy  is  rarely  questioned. 

When  the  agreement  between  the  proof  and  the  survey  was  finally 
secured  a  table  was  made  which  gave  the  acreage  irrigated  by  each 
appropriator  and  the  amount  of  water  required  under  an  assumed  duty  of 
1  cubic  foot  per  second  for  each  70  acres  of  land  described.  The  law 
provides  that  after  these  proofs  of  appropriation  have  been  submitted  and 
before  any  action  has  been  taken  thereon  by  the  board  all  interested  parties 
shall  have  an  opportunity  to  inspect  them  and  contest  any  statements  or 
claims  believed  to  be  erroneous.  There  was  a  large  attendance  at  the  first 
inspection  and  a  general  disposition  to  oppose  the  board's  ruling  that  the 
volume  of  an  appropriation  should  be  determined  by  the  acres  irrigated 
rather  than  by  the  volume  claimed.  But  when  the  total  volume  required 
for  the  land  already  watered  was  compared  with  the  total  flow  of  the  stream, 
and  these  with  the  table  of  recorded  claims,  there  was  a  complete  reversal 
of  this  attitude.  There  were  in  all  132  ditches  along  the  river.  If  claims 
to  water  were  to  govern,  the  first  appropriator  would  have  a  right  to  the 


STATE  CONTROL  OF  STREAMS.  57 

entire  supply  after  midsummer,  and  the  first  six  or  seven  would  have  a 
right  to  the  entire  supply  at  any  time.  This  would  leave;  the  lands  under 
more  than  120  of  the  later  ditches  without  any  legal  right  to  water.  It  was 
manifest,  on  the  other  hand,  that  if  the  board's  ruling  was  maintained  every 
ditch  would  have  water  during  part  of  the  season  and  with  economy  nearly 
all  would  have  water  throughout  the  entire  season.  The  policy  of  the  board 
was  accepted,  and  the  harmonious  and  satisfactory  settlement  of  rights  in 
the  first  adjudication  has  been  followed  by  ten  years  of  similar  results. 
Beginning  in  opposition  to  preconceived  ideas,  the  board  has  in  the  inter- 
vening years  succeeded  in  defining  and  establishing  over  4,000  territorial 
rights,  with  remarkably  few  contests  or  protests  against  its  decisions.  There 
lies  before  me  as  this  is  written  the  records  of  the  last  determination  of 
territorial  water  rights  made  by  the  board  of  control.  In  all  there  are  236 
appropriators,  some  of  whose  rights  date  back  twenty  years  and  amount  in 
the  aggregate  to  500  cubic  feet  per  second.  All  of  the  rights  to  a  river  and 
its  tributaries  have  been  determined  in  this  one  procedure,  and  this  without 
friction  between  appropriators,  and  with  a  total  expense  to  each  of  $1.75  in 
fees  for  the  issuance  and  recording  of  each  certificate  of  appropriation.  This 
history  of  another  western  State  has  been  referred  to  because  it  shows  that 
rights  can  be  settled  without  contest  and  without  neighborhood  ill  feeling. 
The  State  has  footed  the  bills,  but  it  has  been  immensely  benefited  by  its 
expenditure.  It  has  promoted  development,  established  peace  where  dis- 
cord formerly  prevailed,  and  added  to  both  the  selling  and  taxable  value  of 
irrigated  land. 

The  settlement  of  water  rights  in  Wyoming  has  been  described  not  to 
suggest  'the  adoption  of  the  Wyoming  law  in  California,  but  to  encourage 
the  enactment  of  some  law  by  showing  how  order  and  security  have  been 
brought  out  of  confusion  not  unlike  that  portrayed  in  this  report.  It  has 
seemed  more  instructive  to  tell  how  a  thing  has  been  done  than  to  theorize 
as  to  how  it  can  be  done.  In  some  of  its  details  the  Wyoming  law  is 
imperfect.  Later  experience  and  a  better  understanding  of  the  subject 
ought  to  result  in  more  effective  legislation.  It  is  based,  however,  upon 
certain  fundamental  principles  which  are  essential  to  the  success  of  any 
irrigation  system  and  hence  seemed  worthy  of  comment. 

Another  irrigation  law  worthy  of  the  study  of  the  people  of  California 
is  the  Northwest  Irrigation  Act  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada.  In  its  admin- 
istrative methods  it  is  the  most  complete  and  effective  irrigation  code  yet 
enacted  on  this  continent.  A  brief  reference  to  this  law  is  made  in  Bulletin 
No.  58,  Office  of  Experiment  Stations,  but  this  has  proven  insufficient  to  a  fuK 


58  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

understanding  of  its  provisions,  and  a  more  complete  discussion  is  presented 
in  Bulletin  No.  96. 

THE  NEED  OF  A  SPECIAL  TRIBUNAL  TO  SETTLE  EXISTING  BIGHTS. 

The  reports  of  Mr.  Smythe  and  Mr.  Grunsky  show  how  little  progress 
has  been  made  in  reaching  a  final  settlement  of  existing  rights  in  the  courts. 
Professor  Soule*  filed  with  his  report  a  statement  of  litigation  on  the  San 
Joaquin  which  had,  like  the  list  of  water  filings,  to  be  omitted  because  it 
was  a  volume  in  itself.  The  discussion  of  this  subject  by  Judge  Works1  is 
to  the  same  effect.  All  urge  some  plan  for  a  simple,  orderly,  final  settle- 
ment of  all  the  rights  along  each  stream.  To  show  how  little  has  been 
really  accomplished  by  the  court  decrees  thus  far  rendered,  an  abstract  was 
made  of  the  litigated  cases  named  in  Mr.  Grunsky's  report  as  follows: 

ABSTRACT  OF  LITIGATION  OVER  RIGHTS  TO  KINGS  RIVER. 

Kings  River  and  Fremo  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company. 

August  10,  1875:  Denied  right  to  use  Centerville  channel  of  Kings  River. 

November  5,  1885:  Ordered  to  remove  dams,  etc.,  from  Kings  River  and  Centerville  channel 
thereof,  and  to  cease  diverting  water. 

Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company. 

August  10,  1875:  Granted  right  to  use  Centerville  channel  of  Kings  River. 

March  6,  1892:  Adjudged  100  cubic  feet  per  second  ami  no  more,  until  Last  Chance  Canal  is 
supplied  with  190  cubic  feet  per  second. 

March  16,  1892:  Adjudged  100  cubic  feet  per  second  and  no  more,  until  Lower  Kings  River 
Canal  supplied  with  189  cubic  feet  per  second.  Previous  acts  of  diverting  500  cubic  feet  per  second 
declared  unlawful. 

January  8,  1900:  Adjudged  1,000  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  the  '76  Land  and  Water 
Company. 

Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch  Company. 

September  12,  1885:  Ordered  to  remove  all  dams,  etc.,  from  Kings  River  and  enjoined  from 
diverting  water  or  interfering  with  its  flow. 

February  25,  1900:  Adjudged  600  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  prior  rights  of  three  other 
parties,  aggregating  673  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Arkansas  Flat  People. 

February  25,  1900:  Adjudged  right  to  19  cubic  feet  per  second.  (Probably  subject  to  prior  rights 
as  noted  above  in  case  of  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch  Company.) 

Fowler  Switch  Canal  Company. 

July  21,  1885:  Enjoined  forever  from  diverting  any  water,from  Kings  River  or  from  obstructing 
its  flow. 

Emigrant  Ditch  Company. 

February  3,  1890:  Adjudged  190  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  Rancho  Laguna  de  Tache. 

1  Works  on  Irrigation. 


STATE  CONTROL  OF  STREAMS.  59 

76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District). 

November  4,  1889:  Enjoined  forever  from  diverting  water  of  Kings  River,  except  for  riparian 
lam  Is  on  Kings  River  in  Fresno  County. 

September  19,  1893:  Its  rights  declared  inferior  to  right  of  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company,  to  200 
cubic  feet  per  second. 

January  8,  1900:  Adjudged  500  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject,  excepting  during  October  and 
November,  to  prior  right  of  Fresno  Canal  to  1,000  cubic  feet  and  water  due  from  Fresno  Canal  to 
Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company. 

May  9,  1900:  By  stipulation  its  rights  declared  inferior  to  right  of  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch 
Company  to  217  cubic  feet  per  second,  excepting  during  September  and  October;  also  that,  subject  to 
this  prior  right  of  Last  Chance  Company,  it  is  entitled  to  750  cubic  feet  per  second. 

May  9,  1900:  By  stipulation  its  right  declared  inferior  to  right  of  Lower  Kings  River  Water  and 
Ditch  Company  to  182  cubic  feet  per  second,  but,  subject  to  this  prior  right  of  Lower  Kings  River 
Company,  it  is  entitled  to  750  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  area  being  actually  irrigated  from  the  '76 
Canal  is  about  50,000  acres. 

Peoples  Ditch  Company. 

September  19,  1893:  Adjudged  200  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  76  Land  and  Water  Company. 

July  23,  1895:  By  stipulation  its  right  declared  inferior  to  right  of  Lower  Kings  River  Water 
Ditch  Company  to  25  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second.  (Record  not  clear  as  to  amount.) 

October  4,  1897:  Adjudged  200  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  prior  right  of  other  parties  to  130 
cubic  feet  per  second. 

May  15,  1899:  Adjudged  450  cubic  feet  per  second. 

February  25,  1900:  Adjudged  274  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  claims  of  others  amounting  to 

619  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Last  Change  Water  Ditch  Company. 

May  3,  1886:  Enjoined  from  placing  a  dam  on  or  obstructing  flow  of  Cole  Slough. 

March  6,  1892:  Adjudged  190  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  prior  right  of  Fresno  Canal  and 
Irrigation  Company  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second. 

April  13,  1897:  Adjudged  250  cubic  feet  per  second. 

October  5,  1897:  Adjudged,  as  against  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company  and  Lower  Kings  River 
Water  Ditch  Company,  water  in  Kings  River  in  excess  of  300  cubic  feet  per  second,  less  a  pro  rata 
contribution  to  which  Rancho  Laguna  de  Tache  is  given  prior  right,  until  the  excess  equals  100  cubic 
feet  per  second. 

February  25,  1900:  Adjudged  217  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  claims  of  others  to  619  cubic 
fret  per  second. 

May  9,  1900:  Adjudged  217  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Lower  Kings  Hirer  Water  Ditch  Company. 

April  17,  1885:  Adjudged  100  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  Raneho  Laguna  de  Tache. 

March  16,  1892:  Adjudged  159  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  prior  right  of  Fresno  Canal  and 
Irrigation  Company  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second. 

July  23,  1895:  By  stipulation  adjudged  25  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second  (record  not  clear  as  to 
amount)  as  against  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company. 

October  4,  1897:  Adjudged  100  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  prior  right  of  itancho  Laguna  de 
Tache  to  30  cubic  feet  per  second,  as  against  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company  and  Last  Chance  Water 
Ditch  Company. 

February  25,  1900:  Adjudged  182  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  claims  of  others  amounting  to 
619  cubic  feet  per  second. 

May  9,  1900:  By  stipulation  adjudged  182  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  76  Land  and  Water 

Company. 

Orescent  Canal  Company. 

June  4,  1898:  By  stipulation  adjudged  213  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  Stimson  Canal 
Company. 


60  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Stimson  Canal  Company. 

June  4,  1898:  Permitted  to  build  dam  or  levee  at  or  near  North  Fork  and  to  take  water  so  long  as 
prior  right  of  Crescent  Canal  Company  to  213  cubic  feet  per  second  not  interfered  with. 

Ranclio  Laffuna  de  Taclie. 

April  17,  1885:  Denied  more  than  30  cubic  feet  per  second  until  Lower  Kings  River  Ditch  Com- 
pany supplied  with  100  cubic  feet  per  second. 

July  21,  1885:  Given  a  decision  perpetually  enjoining  Fowler  Switch  Canal  Company  from  divert- 
ing any  water  from  Kings  River. 

September  12,  1885:  Given  a  similar  decision  against  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal 
Company. 

November  5,  1885:  Given  a  similar  decision  against  the  Fresno  and  Kings  River  Canal  Company. 

May  3,  1886:  Given  a  decision  enjoining  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  from  enlarging  lower 
channel  of  Kings  River  or  from  obstructing  the  flow  in  Cole  Slough. 

November  4,  1889:  Given  a  similar  decision  against  the  76  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  except 
as  to  riparian  lands  watered  by  it  in  Fresno  County. 

October  4,  1897:  Adjudged  30  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  Lower  Kings  River  Ditch  Company 
and  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company. 

This  abstract  and  the  discussion  in  his  report  shows  that  while  the 
Fowler  Switch  Canal  has  been  enjoined  from  diverting  water  it  does  divert 
enough  to  irrigate  10,000  acres,  almost  enough,  one  would  suppose,  to 
constitute  a  violation  of  the  injunction.  It  shows  that  one  right  now  serves 
land  30  miles  above  the  place  where  the  right  was  acquired,  it  having  been 
floated  that  distance  upstream.  It  shows  that  if  there  were  no  rights  to 
the  stream  except  the  adjudicated  ones,  and  the  map  which  accompanies 
Mr.  Grunsky's  report  ^shows  there  are,  an  attempt  to  divide  the  river  in 
accordance  with  these  would  be  an  exceedingly  difficult  if  not  impossible 
performance.  Whoever  attempts  it  would  have  to  determine  how  much  of 
the  stream  belongs  to  the  riparian  proprietors.  He  would  have  to  determine 
which  of  these  adjudicated  rights  were  entitled  to  water  and  which  should 
go  without.  No  matter  how  honest  he  might  be,  he  could  not  expect  to 
succeed  because  he  would  have  no  adequate  guide  for  his  action.  The 
Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  has  a  prior  right  as  against  the  Last 
Chance  Canal  of  100  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  a  prior  right  against  the 
Lower  Kings  River  Canal  to  a  similar  amount.  It  has  a  prior  right  to 
1,000  cubic  feet  per  second  as  against  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company, 
but  what  are  its  rights  as  against  the  other  canals'?  No  one  has  the  least 
idea,  The  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Ditch  Company  has  a  right  to  600 
cubic  feet  per  second  subject  to  prior  rights  of  673  cubic  feet  per  second. 
What  are  its  rights  outside  of  these  673  feet?  It  will  take  several  more 
lawsuits  to  decide.  The  rights  of  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  are 
inferior  to  those  of  the  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company,  the  Last  Chance 
Water  Ditch  Company,  and  the  Rancho  Laguna  de  Tache,  but  what  is  the 


STATK  CONTROL  OF  STREAMS.  61 

rank  of  priority  as  against  others?  Only  the  courts  can  answer.  The 
records  show  that  the  owners  of  the  Rancho  Laguna  de  Tache  have  had 
injunctions  issued  against  the  use  of  water  by  the  owners  of  the  Fowler 
Switch  Canal,  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal,  and  the  Kings  River  and 
Fresno  Canal.  These  injunctions  have  apparently  not  been  dissolved,  yet, 
in  a  subsequent  action  the  court  has  permitted  one  of  these  canals  to  take 
water  and  it  is  being  taken. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  follow  the  perplexity  of  this  supposed  officer 
any  further.  No  ordinary  mind  would  be  equal  to  the  strain. 

The  showing  made  by  these  official  records  is  referred  to  in  order  to 
make  clear  that  the  State  has  a  duty  toward  these  creators  of  wealth  which 
it  is  not  discharging  so  long  as  it  leaves  any  of  them  in  doubt  as  to  what  is 
their  just  share  of  the  river's  flow,  and  puts  upon  them  the  entire  expense 
of  securing  that  share.  Appropriators  of  water  ought  not  to  be  subjected 
to  the  expense  of  protecting  their  rights.  That  is  a  duty  of  the  Govern- 
ment and  should  be  paid  for  by  public  taxation.  It  is  the  only  way  in 
which  impartial  justice  can  be  assured.  Leaving  the  ownership  of  streams 
to  be  fought  over  in  the  courts  and  titles  to  water  to  be  established  in 
ordinary  suits  at  law  has  never  resulted  in  the  creation  of  satisfactory  con- 
ditions and  never  will.  As  it  now  is  the  same  issues  are  tried  over  and  over 
again.  Each  decision,  instead  of  being  a  step  toward  final  settlement,  too 
often  creates  new  issues  which  in  turn  have  to  be  litigated.  The  suit  of 
one  canal  company  against  another  company  may  settle  the  rights  of  these 
parties  as  against  each  other,  but  it  settles  nothing  with  respect  to  other 
appropriately  not  made  parties  to  the  litigation,  and  the  whole  controversy 
may  be  opened  up  at  any  moment.  A  stream  with  three  appropriators  has 
the  foundation  for  at  least  three  lawsuits:  A  v.  B,  A  v.  C,  and  B  v.  C.  If 
there  are  four  appropriators  the  way  is  open  for  six  adjudications.  Often 
the  appropriators  of  a  stream  are  numbered  by  scores  and  even  hundreds. 
It  might  be  interesting  to  compute  the  number  of  legal  conflicts  necessary 
to  a  judicial  determination  of  the  relative  rights  on  streams  like  the  Yuba, 
and  these  will,  under  the  present  procedure,  increase  with  years  because 
there  will  be  new  appropriations  and  old  ones  will  be  extended.  It  is  not 
surprising  that  the  petition  for  this  investigation  should  state  that  the  litiga- 
tion is  appalling.  It  could  not  be  otherwise.  Litigation  is  as  natural  a 
product  of  the  absence  of  public  control  as  are  weeds  in  a  neglected  field. 

There  can  be  no  stability  under  the  present  situation.  The  law  affords 
no  means  of  enforcing  a  right  when  once  adjudicated  except  through 
another  lawsuit.  Irrigators  can  not  live  in  peace.  Litigation  and  contro- 


62  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

versy  are  forced  upon  them.  To  acquiesce  in  a  new  diversion,  through 
sympathy,  or  for  the  sake  of  peace,  may  lay  the  foundation  for  an  adverse 
right  by  prescription  and  end  in  the  curtailment  or  the  overthrow  of  all 
the  rights  of  the  peace  lover.  This  uncertainty  and  the  fear  of  being 
supplanted  which  grows  out  of  it  is  the  cause  of  much  of  the  hostility 
with  which  appropriators  regard  new  ditches,  and  is  the  motive  behind 
much  of  the  extravagance  and  waste  which  sometimes  prevail  in  the  use- 
of  wa.ter.  With  a  right  clearly  denned  and  protected,  its  owner  lias  no 
fear  of  shortage  in  time  of  need,  and  he  is  willing,  when  his  crops  do 
not  require  water,  to  have  it  utilized  by  others.  But  when  the  right  is 
insecure  or  not  defined  the  instinct  of  self-protection  makes  an  Ishmaelite 
of  every  water  user.  His  hand  must  be  against  every  man,  as  every 
man's  hand  is  against  him.  Duty  to  himself  and  to  those  dependent  on 
him  makes  it  necessary  that  he  shall  use  all  means  at  his  command  to 
discourage  the  establishment  of  rights  which  may  later  interfere  with  his 
necessary  use  of  water.  Under  such  a  system  every  new  appropriates 
is  a  new  element  of  uncertainty  and  another  menace  to  the  peace  of  the 
community.  The  whole  system  is  wrong.  It  is  wrong  in  principle  as 
well  as  faulty  in  procedure.  It  assumes  that  the  establishment  of  titles 
to  the  snows  on  the  mountains  and  the  rains  falling  on  the  public  land 
and  the  waters  collected  in  the  lakes  and  rivers,  on  the  use  of  which 
the  development  of  the  State  must  in  a  great  measure  depend,  is  a  private 
matter.  It  ignores  public  interests  in  a  resource  upon  which  the  enduring 
prosperity  of  communities  must  rest.  It  is  like  A  suing  B  for  control  of 
property  which  belongs  to  C.  Many  able  attorneys  hold  that  these  decreed 
rights  will  in  time  be  held  invalid,  because  when  they  were  established  the 
public,  the  real  owner  of  the  water,  never  had  its  day  in  court. 

ATTORNEYS   AND   COURTS   NOT   RESPONSIBLE. 

The  responsibility  for  this  situation  rests  first  of  all  with  the  irrigators 
and  ditch  owners.  It  arises  from  their  reluctance  to  submit  to  any  sort 
of  supervision  and  effective  control.  Although  attorneys  and  judges  have 
had  much  to  do  with  these  controversies  over  water  rights,  they  are  in 
no  sense  responsible  for  their  creation.  In  fact,  under  the  present  situation 
the  courts  are  the  only  protection  against  a  rule  of  force  or  anarchy.  At 
present  no  class  of  citizens  are  doing  more  to  reform  the  irrigation  laws  of 
California  than  its  attorneys.  Wherever  they  have  been  appealed  to  they 
have  given  their  time  and  influence  to  promote  the  success  of  this  investi- 
gation. One  of  the  ablest  arguments  to  which  I  have  listened  in  favor  of  a 
special  tribunal  to  make  a  final  determination  of  all  existing  rights  was 


STATE  CONTROL  OF  STREAMS.  63 

made  by  a  judge  who,  through  painful  experience,  had  become  impressed 
with  the  danger  of  leaving-  these  matters  to  be  settled  by  accidental  litigation, 
which  always  includes  the  judges  among  its  chief  victims. 

Under  a  rational  irrigation  code  titles  to  water  are  established  like  titles 
to  public  land,  by  proceedings  which  are  wholly  ministerial.  This  is  the 
case  under  the  Northwest  irrigation  act  of  Canada,  arid  under  the  Wyoming 
irrigation  law,  where  the  supreme  court  recently  held  that  even  in  determin- 
ing territorial  rights  the  State  board  of  control  acts  as  an  administrative 
and  not  as  a  judicial  body.  (Farm  Investment  Co.  v.  Carpenter,  61  Pac. 
Rep.,  258.) 

If  the  amount  of  an  appropriation  depends  upon  the  volume  of  water 
beneficially  used,  the  first  step  in  the  determination  of  a  water  right 
should  be  a  physical  investigation.  The  water  supply  should  be  measured, 
the  capacity  of  the  ditch  which  diverts  it  should  be  determined,  and  the 
area  and  location  of  the  land  on  which  the  water  has  been  used  defined. 
With  these  facts  before  it,  the  tribunal  which  fixes  the  amount  of  a  water 
right  has  only  a  problem  in  mathematics.  The  judicial  element  is  no  more 
present  than  it  is  in  fixing  the  taxable  value  of  a  horse  or  cow,  in  passing 
upon  an  assessment  schedule,  or  determining  whether  or  not  a  homesteader 
has  complied  with  the  land  law.  Determining  the  amount  of  water  used  is 
no  more  a  judicial  act  than  the  fixing  of  a  tax  rate  by  a  board  of  supervisors, 
the  leasing  value  of  land  by  a  board  of  land  commissioners,  or  hundreds 
of  other  acts  of  official  and  everyday  life  which  require  the  exercise  of 
ordinary  judgment  and  discretion.  One  of  the  most  mistaken  and  injurious 
beliefs  is  that  rights  to  water  can  be  settled  only  through  a  lawsuit. 
Nevertheless,  the  opinion  seems  to  prevail  widely,  not  alone  in  California 
but  throughout  the  arid  region,  that  water  is  a  kind  of  property  which  must 
be  disposed  of  exclusively  by  the  courts. 

THE  NATTTRE  OF  RIGHTS  TO  WATER. 

The  water  problem  of  California  involves  one  of  the  serious  social  and 
economic  questions  of  our  time.  Every  arid  State  will  watch  the  action 
taken  and  be  influenced  by  it.  The  irrigated  countries  of  the  Old  World 
will  measure  our  ability  to  deal  honestly  and  wisely  with  arid-land  problems 
by  the  way  this  one  is  settled.  The  action  to  be  taken,  and  some  action 
should  be  taken,  ought  not  to  be  shaped  by  laws  borrowed  from  a  country 
of  rains  and  fogs  or  made  to  perpetuate  the  mistakes  of  the  earlier  law- 
makers. It  ought  to  represent  the  enlightenment  of  the  twentieth  century 
and  the  spirit  of  a  republic  instead  of  a  monarchy.  If  it  does  it  must  have 
as  a  fundamental  idea  the  giving  of  equal  rights  to  all  in  our  common 


64  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

lieritage.  The  doctrine  that  air,  water,  and  sunshine  are  gifts  from  God 
should  not  be  lightly  set  aside  even  in  arid  lands.  There  is  need  for 
adequate  protection  for  investments  in  canals  and  ditches,  but  this  can  be 
afforded  without  having  the  water  they  carry  become  private  property  or 
the  stream  itself  become  subject  to  private  ownership.  The  growth  and 
danger  of  monopolies  in  oil,  copper,  coal,  and  iron  afford  a  warning  of  the 
greater  danger  of  permitting  monopolies  in  water.  The  growing  belief  in' 
the  public  ownership  of  public  utilities  applies  especially  to  water,  that 
most  essential  of  all  utilities 

In  monarchies  streams  belong  to  the  king,  but  in  a  republic  they  belong 
to  the  people,  and  ought  forever  to  be  kept  as  public  property  for  the  benefit 
of  all  who  use  them,  and  for  them  alone. 

SHOULD   APPROPRIATIONS   BE   MADE   PERPETUAL   OR  LIMITED,  LIKE  FRAN- 
CHISES,  TO   A  NUMBER   OF  YEARS? 

The  irrigation  laws  of  all  the  arid  States  make  rights  to  water  perpetual. 
This  was  formerly  the  policy  of  many  European  countries,  where  it  has 
since  been  abandoned,  the  practice  now  being  to  treat  appropriations  as 
franchises  and  limit  their  life  to  a  definite  period,  usually  fifty  or  ninety- 
nine  years.  It  is  worthy  of  consideration  whether  or  not  it  will  be  well 
for  California  to  make  a  similar  change.  Irrigation  is  as  yet  in  its  infancy, 
and  our  laws  and  policies  are  undergoing  an  evolution.  A  franchise  to 
use  water  for  fifty  years  would  serve  every  purpose  of  development  as 
well  as  a  grant  in  perpetuity.  It  would  be  more  effective  if  this  franchise 
were  adequately  protected,  while  a  grant  limited  in  time  would  permit  of 
any  modifications  which  experience  might  prove  advisable  when  these 
franchises  expire. 

The  present  tendency  in  cities  toward  the  municipal  ownership  of  public 
utilities  will,  it  is  believed,  extend  in  time  to  the  management  and  distribu- 
tion of  rivers.  This  is  the  tendency  in  all  older  irrigated  countries  where 
many  of  the  works  are  operated  as  government  property.  Practically  all 
of  the  ditches  and  canals  in  Italy  are  owned  by  the  Government,  as  are  all 
the  more  recent  ones  in  India  and  Egypt. 

What  -has  been  done  in  this  country  in  the  giving  away  of  rights  to 
rivers  is  only  a  reflection  of  the  early  policy  of  cities  where  perpetual  fran- 
chises were  not  looked  upon  with  any  particular  disfavor.  The  philosophy 
of  this,  as  applied  to  streams,  has  been  so  well  stated  by  Baird  Smith,  in  his 
history  of  irrigation  in  Italy,  that  it  is  inserted: 

A  grant  in  perpetuity  of  such  a  material  as  water,  whose  value  must  necessarily  go  on  augment- 
ing with  the  progress  of  agricultural  irrigation,  is  an  art  of  injustice  toward  the  Government. 

For  there  is  no  point  better  established  by  experience  in  northern  Italy  generally,  and  in  Lorn- 


CONCLUDING   SUGGESTIONS.  65 

bardy  particularly,  than  this,  that  the  selfishness  of  grantees  in  perpetuity  of  water  has  been  one  of 
the  most  serious  obstacles  to  the  development  of  irrigation.  Acting  on  the  principle  that  they  had  a 
right  to  do  what  they  liked  with  their  own,  they  were  in  the  habit  of  suspending  arbitrarily  the  sup- 
plies of  water  disposed  of  by  them  to  other  parties  under  subordinate  grants,  of  increasing  as  they 
thought  fit  the  prices  to  be  paid,  and,  in  a  word,  of  pushing  to  its  utmost  limits  the  right  of  absolute 
property  purchased  by  them  from  the  State.  But  an  agriculture  founded  on  artificial  irrigation  can 
not  advance  as  it  ought  to  do  under  such  an  arbitrary  system.  (Vol.  2,  pp.  137  and  138. ) 

The  holders  of  ancient  grants  in  perpetuity  have  occasionally  asserted  an  absolute  right  of 
property  in  the  water  thus  granted  to  them,  but  the  legal  tribunals  have  invariably  rejected  such 
claims  on  the  ground  that  the  grants  were  made  for  the  general  good  of  the  country  as  much  as  the 
special  advantage  of  the  grantee.  (Vol.  2,  p.  259. ) 

Because  of  this  experience  it  has  been  found  necessary,  in  order  to 
secure  the  greater  development  and  prosperity  of  irrigated  agriculture,  for 
the  Italian  Government  to  purchase  a  large  number  of  these  early  and 
important  grants  in  order  that  the  State  might  reassume  a  compiehensive 
and  effective  control  of  the  streams. 

CONCLUDING  SUGGESTIONS. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that  the  gentlemen  engaged  in  this  investigation 
should  have  agreed  in  their  recommendations  regarding  legislation.  Being 
in  accord  with  their  views  that  the  framing  of  irrigation  laws  is  a  State  mat- 
ter, and  agreeing  with  the  general  features  of  the  system  recommended,  no 
separate  recommendations  in  this  paper  are  required  A  few  suggestions 
are  offered  regarding  the  practical  operation  of  these  recommendations 
should  they  become  laws. 

JURISDICTION  OF  SPECIAL  TRIBUNAL. 

Should  a  special  tribunal  be  created  to  define  existing  rights,  that 
tribunal  should  have  exclusive  original  jurisdiction  of  this  matter.  .It  will 
not  do  to  create  such  a  tribunal  and  still  leave-  the  way  open  to  litigate 
rights  to  water  in  the  courts.  Whoever  is  given  control  of  this  matter 
must  have  exclusive  control.  The  party  who  files  on  a  homestead  must 
make  his  proof  in  the  United  States  land  office.  He  can  not  apply  to  the 
courts  for  a  patent.  If  he  could,  demoralization  in  land  matters  would  be 
prompt  and  certain.  In  the  same  way,  if  parties  can  elect  whether  they 
will  go  to  the  courts  or  go  before  a  board  of  control,  the  board  of  control 
will  be  worse  than  useless.  Suppose  there  are  ten  appropriators  from  a 
stream,  if  nine  elect  to  have  their  rights  settled  before  the  board  of  control, 
and  one  goes  into  court,  there  will  be  two  sets  of  priorities  and  unending 
complications  as  a  result.  A  double  jurisdiction  can  not  be  permitted  in 
this  matter  any  more  than  a  railroad  can  be  successfully  operated  with  two 
presidents  to  direct  its  policy. 

23856— No.  100—01 5 


66  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  ADEQUATE   PRELIMINARY    SURVEYS   AND   INVESTIGA- 
TIONS. 

If  there  is  to  be  a  special  tribunal  to  determine  rights  to  water,  the  jus- 
tice and  success  of  its  labors  will  depend  in  a  large  measure  on  its  action 
being  preceded  in  every  case  by  an  adequate  and  impartial  investigation 
of  physical  facts.  Before  it  can  determine  how  much  water  has  been  appro- 
priated it  must  know  how  much  water  a  stream  carries.  Before  it  can  decide 
how  much  water  has  been  beneficially  used  in  irrigation,  it  must  know  the 
location  and  extent  of  the  irrigated  land,  and  have  an  approximate  knowl- 
edge of  the  duty  of  water.  Hence,  streams  must  be  gaged,  the  capacity  and 
length  of  ditches  must  be  measured,  the  area  of  land  irrigated  must  be  sur- 
veyed and  its  necessities  determined.  To  make  these  measurements  and 
prepare  the  necessary  maps  on  a  single  stream  is  not  a  matter  of  days  but 
of  months,  and  it  should  be  completed  before  the  taking  of  testimony  begins. 
Hence  the  creation  of  this  tribunal  and  the  inauguration  of  its  work  will 
not  mean  rapid  change  or  sweeping  revolution  in  existing  conditions.  The 
people  of  the  State  must  prepare  themselves  to  make  haste  slowly,  and  to 
continue  to  exercise  patience  and  forbearance.  If  the  first  two  years  of 
this  tribunal's  existence  witnesses  the  adjudication  of  rights  on  a  half  dozen 
streams  it  will  have  done  well.  Few  of  the  people  talked  with  realize  how 
important  an  element  time  is  in  this  matter.  The  creation  of  this  tribunal 
is  only  a  means  to  an  end,  not  the  end.  The  passage  of  a  law  creating  it 
will  only  modify  the  existing  situation.  Rights  on  some  streams  will  be 
denned  the  first  year,  on  others  the  second,  while  it  may  be  five  or  more 
years  before  some  can  be  reached.  Slow  progress  is  inevitable,  and  while 
it  is  a  reason  for  beginning  promptly,  it  is  not  wholly  a  disadvantage.  It 
will  give  timid  appropriators  an  opportunity  to  realize  that  the  labors  of 
this  tribunal  do  not  mean  the  destruction  of  existing  rights,  but  their  pro- 
tection. There  will  be  some  misgivings  at  first,  and  to  allay  these  and 
avert  opposition  based  thereon  the  tribunal  should  begin  on  a  stream  where 
the  complications  are  few  and  the  interests  not  important.  If  it  acts  wisely 
and  conservatively  it  will  succeed  as  have  similar  tribunals  elsewhere. 
Later  on  its  trouble  will  come  with  a  demand  for  aid  from  more  irrigators 
than  it  can  assist. 

THE  FAVORING  CONDITIONS  FOR  THESE  ADJUDICATIONS. 

In  beginning  its  work  in  California  such  a  tribunal  will  have  many 
advantages  over  similar  boards  in  other  States.  It  can  avail  itself  of  their 
experience.  It  will  have  the  aid  and  cooperation  of  the  National  Govern- 
ment to  an  extent  not  heretofore  afforded  the  irrigation  authorities  of  other 


CONCLUDING    SUGGESTIONS.  67 

arid  States.  The  investigations  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  to  deter- 
mine the  duty  of  water  have  thrown  much  light  on  the  necessities  of 
irrigation,  enabling  rights  to  be  established  more  nearly  in  accord  with 
actual  use  than  ever  before. 

THE  PROTECTION  OF  RIGHTS  TO  WATER. 

After  rights  are  denned  they  must  be  protected.  This  can  not  be  left 
to  the  appropriators  themselves.  Public  control  is  a  necessity.  To  make 
this  control  effective,  so  that  each  user  will  be  assured  of  his  just  share,  no 
matter  how  far  from  the  mountains  his  farm  is  located,  requires  organization 
and  administrative  ability  of  high  order.  At  the  head  of  this  system  should 
be  an  irrigation  engineer  of  demonstrated  ability  and  executive  capacity. 
When  the  tribunal  has  concluded  its  adjudication  of  the  rights  to  a  stream 
it  should  transmit  a  list  of  the  priorities  and  amounts  of  appropriations  to 
the  State  engineer,  who  should  prepare  proper  instructions  for  his  subordi- 
nates for  the  protection  of  these  rights.  The  division  of  streams  will  require 
the  State  to  be  divided  into  districts  of  convenient  size,  the  boundaries  of 
which  should  be  drainage  lines  and  the  number  of  the  districts  should  be 
determined  by  the  importance  of  the  work  to  be  done,  the  aim  being  to 
have  no  district  larger  than  a  commissioner  can  properly  attend  to.  It  will 
be  impossible  for  the  State  engineer  to  discharge  properly  the  other  duties 
devolving  upon  him  and  give  the  necessary  personal  supervision  to  the 
work  of  these  commissioners.  This  supervision  will  make  it  necessary  for 
the  State  to  be  divided  into  larger  areas,  called  divisions,  and  a  superin- 
tendent should  be  provided  for  each.  Southern  California  would  form  one 
division,  northern  California  could  be  one  at  present,  later  on  two  will  be 
required. 

The  State  engineer  should  have  charge  of  the  surveys  and  measure- 
ments which  precede  the  determination  of  existing  rights.  This  will  enable 
him  to  become  familiar  with  the  conditions  on  each  stream,  to  have  a  knowl- 
edge of  its  water  supply,  and  have  in  his  office  the  records  and  information 
needed  to  promptly  instruct  water  commissioners  and  superintendents  in  the 
performance  of  their  duties. 

THE  ACQUIREMENT  OF  RIGHTS  HEREAFTER. 

Thus  far  we  have  considered  only  the  rights  already  in  existence.  Pro- 
vision should  be  made  for  the  establishment  of  rights  hereafter,  so  that 
development  may  proceed  without  any  interruption  or  uncertainty.  In 
order  to  do  this  all  unappropriated  water  should  be  declared  State  property 
and  the  methods  by  which  rights  to  this  water  may  be  acquired  clearly 


68  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

defined.  The  State  engineer  should  be  given  charge  of  this  matter  and  it 
should  be  made  necessary  for  every  party  desiring  to  appropriate  water 
hereafter  to  apply  to  the  State  engineer  for  a  permit.  No  one  should  be 
allowed  to  acquire  a  right  without  compliance  with  this  provision.  Taking 
State  water  without  a  permit  should  be  dealt  with  in  the  same  way  as  cutting 
timber  from  State  land  without  a  permit.  It  should  be  made  a  misdemeanor. 
A  regulation  of  this  kind  is  indispensable  to  securing  an  accurate  record  of 
rights  to  water  or  to  protect  existing  rights. 

The  State  engineer  should  have  authority  to  refuse  these  permits  where 
the  water  supply  is  exhausted  or  where  the  proposed  use  will  be  detrimental 
to  public  interests.  In  order  that  he  may  act  intelligently  on  these  applica- 
tions every  party  applying  for  a  permit  should  be  required  to  give  notice  in 
some  newspaper  in  the  county  where  water  is  to  be  diverted  of  his  intention 
to  make  such  application,  and  this  notice  should  show  the  location  and 
amount  of  the  proposed  diversion.  This  will  give  parties  likely  to  be 
injured  an  opportunity  to  communicate  with  the  State  engineer  before  •he 
takes  action.  All  permits  issued  should  be  made  a  matter  of  record  in  the 
engineer's  office.  The  time  of  completing  a  right  should  be  fixed  in  the 
permit,  and  when  this  time  has  expired  the  holders  of  the  permits  should  be 
required  to  submit  proof  of  their  appropriations  before  the  tribunal  charged 
with  the  duty  of  determining  them. 

NAVIGATION  BIGHTS  ON  THE  SACRAMENTO  AND  SAN  JOAOTIN  RIVERS. 

The  largest  volume  of  unused  water  in  California  comes  from  the 
Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  valleys,  and  it  is  here  that  the  greatest 
development  in  the  future  will  take  place.  It  is  not  believed  that  this 
increased  use  of  water  will  seriously  injure  navigation  interests,  because  a 
large  percentage  of  the  water  diverted  will  return  to  the  stream  as  waste  or 
seepage.  Irrigation  will  create  a  more  uniform  flow.  There  will  be  lower 
water  in  the  spring  and  higher  water  during  the  rainless  season.  But,  in 
order  to  avert  any  conflicts,  the  creation  of  a  State  engineering  or  irrigation 
bureau  should  be  immediately  followed  by  a  conference  with  the  officials 
of  the  United  States  Grovernment  having  supervision  over  navigable  streams, 
looking  to  such  improvements  of  these  rivers  as  will  permit  of  the  largest 
possible  use  of  water  in  irrigation.  The  complete  utilization  of  these  two 
rivers  will  give  California  the  largest  rural  population  of  any  State  in  the 
Union.  Whatever  expenditure  is  necessary  to  protect  navigation  interests 
and  enable  this  result  to  be  brought  about  should  be  made.  Even  if  it 
requires  the  construction  of  locks  and  the  canalizing  of  both  streams,  the 


CONCLUDING    SUGGESTIONS.  69 

improvements  will  be  well  worth  their  cost,  and,  as  it  is  a  recognized  tield 
for  the  expenditure  of  Government  appropriations,  a  proper  presentation  of 
the  situation  will,  it  is  believed,  lead  to  the  extension  of  the  required  aid. 

TERM  OF  OFFICE. 

t 

The  value  of  any  system  must  depend  largely  on  the  capacity  of  those 
who  administer  it.  Incompetent  men  can  make  a  failure  of  any  law,  while 
good  men  can  do  much  with  an  imperfect  one.  The  administration  of  an 
irrigation  law  in  California  will  be  a  difficult  matter  under  the  most 
favorable  conditions,  and  the  broader  the  experience  of  those  in  charge  the 
better  will  be  the  results.  A  water  commissioner  is  not  made  in  a  day  or  a 
year.  The  longer  a  State  engineer  or  member  of  the  board  of  control 
serves  the  better  equipped  he  will  be  to  perform  his  duties.  For  these 
reasons  the  term  of  office  of  the  members  of  the  board  of  control,  State 
engineer,  and  water  commissioners  should  not  be  limited  to  two  years.  Six 
^vears  is  short  enough  term  for  the  members  of  the  board  of  control  and 
State  engineer,  and  not  less  than  four  years  for  the  commissioners. 

The  reform  of  the  irrigation  laws  of  California  involves  the  future  of  a 
great  commonwealth.  What  is  done  should  be  done  with  the  purpose  of 
promoting  the  growth  of  the  State  and  insuring  the  peace  and  prosperity  of 
its  citizens  for  generations  to  come.  The  possibilities  which  wait  on  success 
and  the  evils  which  will  surely  attend  failure  ought  to  enlist  the  efforts  and 
intellects  of  the  ablest  and  best  men  in  the  State.  It  is  an  opportunity  for 
the  exercise  of  constructive  statesmanship  which  rarely  appears  in  the  life 
of  any  commonwealth.  The  task  is  not  to  piece  together  the  discordant 
fragments  of  laws  and  decisions  which  now  control,  but  to  create  an 
irrigation  code  worthy  of  an  enlightened  and  self-governing  people;  to  do 
for  California  what  Napoleon  and  Cavour  did  for  Italy,  what  Deakiu  has 
done  in  part  for  Australia,  and  Dennis  more  effectively  for  Canada. 
Success  in  this  will  mark  the  beginning  of  an  economic  revolution  whose 
influence  will  be  felt  throughout  the  West.  If  the  creation  of  institutions 
worthy  of  the  time  and  place  can  come  as  a  part  of  the  world-wide 
movement  of  trade  and  population  toward  the  Pacific  coast,  and  of  material 
development  of  arid  America  by  public  and  private  aid,  which  is  now  being 
so  strenuously  urged,  the  opening  years  of  the  twentieth  century  will 
witness  a  new  era  of  home  making  in  the  West. 


rcstc 


THE  IRRIGATION  PROBLEMS  OF  HONEY  LAKE  BASIN,  CALIFORNIA. 

By  WILLIAM  K.  SMYTHK, 

Vice-Prexident  of  the  California  Water  and  Forest  Association. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

HISTORY  AND    RESOURCES. 

The  region  on  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains  differs  materially 
from  all  other  parts  of  California.  To  the  minds  of  its  earliest  pioneers  these  differ- 
ences appeared  to  present  an  insuperable  objection  to  the  inclusion  of  Honey  Lake 
Valley  in  the  new  State.  They  felt  that  the  great  mountain  range  had  reared  a 
natural  boundary  between  the  two  slopes  which  men  should  respect,  and  in  conse- 
quence sought  by  every  means  in  their  power  to  be  left  outside  of  California.  The 
chief  objection  lay  in  the  difficulty  of  communication  between  this  remote  region  and 
the  seat  of  government  in  the  Sacramento  Valley,  especially  in  the  winter  season 
when  legislation  would  be  enacted. 

Their  first  effort  to  free  themselves  from  this  embarrassment  aimed  at  the 
formation  of  a  new  Territory,  to  which  they  gave  the  pleasant  name  of  "Nataqua." 
Such  a  Territory  was  actually  organized  by  a  handful  of  settlers  on  April  26,  1856. 
The  boundaries  established  included  a  large  portion  of  Nevada,  as  well  as  a  part  of 
California.  By  a  ludicrous  blunder,  arising  from  misunderstanding  in  regard  to 
the  exact  location  of  the  one  hundred  and  twentieth  meridian  of  west  longitude,  the 
founders  of  the  new  Territory  were  themselves  excluded,  while  a  much  larger  popula- 
tion in  western  Nevada  which  had  not  been  consulted  were  within  the  boundaries 
of  the  impossible  commonwealth.  The  code  of  laws  adopted  for  the  new  political 
division  disposed  of  the  irrigation  problem  in  the  following  brief  paragraph: 

SEC.  8.  No  person  shall  divert  water  from  its  original  channel  to  the  injury  of  any  prior  occupant. 

Probably  this  provision  was  intended  to  refer,  not  to  the  "prior  occupant"  of 
the  water  or  the  channel,  as  it  reads,  but  to  the  occupant  of  the  land  along  the 
stream,  and  was  thus  the  first  assertion  of  the  riparian  doctrine  in  this  locality. 

After  the  failure  of  this  attempt  to  provide  themselves  with  civil  government, 
the  settlers  petitioned  Congress  to  be  included  in  Nevada.  In  the  meantime  they 
assembled  in  mass  meeting  and  adopted  (February  13,  1858)  a  new  code  purporting 
to  be  "The  Laws  of  Honey  Lake  Valley."  In  this  code  the  same  provision  for  water 
appropriations  was  made  as  in  the  case  of  "Nataqua."  The  locality  experienced 
various  political  vicissitudes,  including  an  armed  struggle  (locally  known  as  "the 
sagebrush  war")  between  the  Nevada  people  and  those  of  Plumas  County,  Cal., 
before  it  was  safely  and  finally  incorporated  as  a  part  of  the  Golden  State,  in  1864. 
This  was  accomplished  by  the  act  of  April  1  of  that  year,  authorizing  the  formation 
of  the  new  county  of  Lassen,  which  took  its  name  from  the  valiant  pioneer. 

71 


72  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  COUNTRY. 

The  Honey  Lake  Basin  lies  in  northeastern  California,  between  the  Sierra  Nevada 
Mountains  and  the  State  of  Nevada.  It  is  in  the  southern  part  of  Lassen  County, 
and  separated  only  by  the  county  of  Modoc  from  Oregon.  Its  only  railroad  com- 
munication with  other  parts  of  California  is  by  way  of  Reno,  Nev.,  over  the  Nevada- 
California-Oregon  Railway  (narrow  gage),  the  distance  from  Reno  to  the  principal 
station  in  the  valley  being  80  miles.  Although  the  extent  of  fertile  soil  and  of 
potential  water  supply  would  be  adequate  to  the  support  of  a  population,  in  country 
and  in  town,  of  at  least  100,000  souls — and  the  character  of  surrounding  resources 
and  the  demand  for  the  natural  products  of  the  region  would  warrant  it — the  locality 
is  but  sparsely  peopled,  and  even  those  who  are  there  are  forced  to  contend,  through 
ceaseless  litigation  and  neighborhood  strife,  for  the  comparatively  small  amount  of 
water  represented  by  the  perennial  flow  of  the  streams.  But  the  present  population 
is  decidedly  prosperous,  perhaps  more  so,  on  the  whole,  and  considering  the  amount 
of  capital  invested,  than  the  agriculturists  in  any  other  part  of  the  State.  For  the 
most  part  they  are  engaged  in  raising  hay  and  live  stock,  principally  cattle  and  horses. 
Sheep  and  hogs  are  also  very  profitable.  Natural  hay  is  raised  along  moist  river 
bottoms,  and  in  a  large  district  known  as  "The  Tules,"  on  the  western  border  of 
Hone}'  Lake.  On  the  sagebrush  lands  reclaimed  by  irrigation  three  crops  of  alfalfa 
are  raised  each  season,  the  total  yield  ranging  from  3  to  8  tons  per  acre,  with  5  tons 
as  a  fair  average.  On  small  areas,  with  skillful  irrigation,  this  average  should  be 
increased  considerably.  Wherever  small  orchards  have  been  established  they  have 
brought  good  returns  upon  the  investment,  though  years  when  late  frosts  injure  the 
fruit  are  not  infrequent. 

CLIMATE   AND   PRODUCTS. 

The  climate  of  the  Hone_y  Lake  Basin  differentiates  it  in  a  marked  degree  from 
California  as  a  whole,  and  resembles  the  famous  climate  of  New  Mexico  much  more 
than  that  of  southern  California,  the  great  interior  valleys,  and  the  coast  region. 
The  altitude  of  Honey  Lake  is  3,949  feet,  and  that  of  the  surrounding  watershed 
from  4,500  to  8.000  feet.  This  elevation,  taken  in  connection  with  the  intercepting 
barrier  of  the  great  mountain  range,  which  cools  the  atmosphere  and  condenses  the 
moisture  into  snow,  makes  the  climate  distinctly  that  of  the  temperate  zone  rather 
than  that  of  the  semitropics,  which  is  so  closely  associated  with  the  name  of 
California.  But  the  climate  is  extremely  healthful,  and  to  many  people  even  more 
agreeable  than  that  of  the  lowland  or  coastal  regions. 

The  true  designation  of  this  locality  would  be  the  California  highlands.  Here 
the  winters  are  not  very  cold  nor  the  summers  very  warm.  The  climate  is  rather  a 
mild  type  of  the  temperate  zone.  Frequently  plowing  can  be  done  during  every 
month  of  the  year,  but  usually  farming  operations  are  suspended  for  about  two 
months,  from  the  middle  of  December  to  the  middle  of  February.  While  exact  data 
is  lacking  in  regard  to  all  the  resources  of  the  region,  it  is  distinctly  in  the  land  of 
sunshine,  and  there  are  probably  not  far  from  300  clear  days  in  the  average  year. 
Ice  forms  on  still  water  during  a  brief  period  in  the  winter,  as  a  rule,  for  the  ther- 
mometer f requently  goes  far  below  freezing  at  night — rarely  below  zero — though  it  is 
generally  above  the  freezing  point  in  the  daytime,  and  the  winter  mean  is  considerably 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONKY    LAKE    BASIN.  73 

above  it.  The,  snowfall  is  mostly  confined  to  the  surrounding  mountains,  where  it 
accumulates  to  a  great  depth.  That  which  falls  in  the  valley  is  slight,  and  shades  off 
to  nothing  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  lake.  The  spring  season  is  windy  and  showery, 
and  sometimes  brings  a  belated  snowstorm.  The  summer  temperature  occasionally 
rises  to  100°  or  a  little  more,  but  brings  little  discomfort,  because  of  the  dry  air  and 
the  invariably  cool  nights.  The  autumn  is  long  and  delightful,  sometimes  extending* 
well  into  December.  As  a  whole,  the  climate  must  be  regarded  as  very  favorable  to 
the  development  of  the  highest  forms  of  civilization.  While  it  will  not  permit  the 
production  of  the  delicate  fruits  raised  in  other  parts  of  the  State,  the  hardy  fruits 
and  vegetables  gain  here  a  perfection  of  flavor  and  color  which  should  give  them  a 
very  large  market  when  they  can  be  shipped  upon  a  sufficient  scale. 

SURROUNDING  RESOURCES. 

The  natural  resources  surrounding  Honey  Lake  Valley  are  both  varied  and  valu- 
able. One  of  the  most  important  of  these  is  the  wide  expanse  of  public  grazing 
lands,  bearing  reliable  crops  of  nutritious  grasses  and  equal  to  the  sustenance  of  vast 
numbers  of  live  stock.  The  climate  is  also  favorable  to  the  live-stock  industry  and 
furnishes  remarkable  immunity  from  disease.  The  droughts  which  have  sometimes 
afflicted  other  parts  of  the  State  have  seldom  if  ever  done  serious  injury  in  this 
locality.  Live  stock  have  sometimes  suffered  severely  in  hard  winters,  but  this  has 
occurred  only  rarely.  Next  to  the  grazing  lands  the  large  pine  forests  in  the  moun- 
tains and  plateaus  west  of  the  valley  constitute  the  most  valuable  item  of  surrounding 
resources.  These  forests  are  principally  yellow  pine,  but  also  include  quite  a  per- 
centage of  the  more  valuable  sugar  pine.  This  timber  supply  has  thus  far  been 
drawn  upon  only  in  the  slightest  degree,  but  must  be  a  great  source  of  wealth  in  the 
future.  Mineral  resources  are  extensive  and  varied,  but  mostly  undeveloped.  There 
are  mines  of  both  precious  and  base  metals  and  the  country  has  not  been  prospected 
nearly  as  thoroughly  as  other  localities.  The  two  great  needs  of  the  region  are  an 
intelligent  development  of  the  water  supply  for  irrigation,  and  then  a  new  railroad 
outlet  to  connect  with  navigation  on  the  Sacramento  River  and  ultimately  with  the 
northern  transcontinental  railway  lines  and  the  Columbia  River.  With  the  develop- 
ment of  irrigation  and  the  consequent  coming  of  population,  the  railroad  would 
naturally  follow,  and  the  timber  and  mineral  resources  be  brought  into  use.  The 
mountain  streams  furnish  considerable  water  power  which  might  be  made  available 
at  convenient  points  without  decreasing  the  supply  for  irrigation. 

A  VARIETY  OF  PROBLEMS. 

Taken  as  a  whole,  the  Honey  Lake  Basin  and  its  surroundings  perhaps  furnish 
as  good  an  example  of  the  irrigation  and  kindred  problems  as  any  locality  that  may 
be  found  between  the  Missouri  River  and  the  Pacific  Ocean.  Every  phase  of  the 
water  question  in  arid  lands  is  here  exhibited,  with  the  single  exception  of  interstate 
streams.  Even  this  is  escaped  but  narrowly  by  the  chance  which  located  the  western 
boundary  of  Nevada  a  few  miles  further  east  than  many  people  thought  it  ought  to 
have  been  placed.  This  question  may  even  yet  arise  in  the  future  from  the  necessity 
of  irrigating  the  eastern  portion  of  the  Honey  Lake  Desert  with  waters  originating 


74  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

in  California.  But  even  now  we  see  closely  related  to  the  economic  life  of  the  pres- 
ent and  future  population  of  this  valley  the  problems  of  forest  preservation;  of  man- 
agement of  the  public  grazing  lands;  of  storage  of  vast  quantities  of  water  now  worse 
than  wasted;  of  the  disposal  of  arable  public  lands  to  settlers;  of  rights,  and  limita- 
tions of  rights,  belonging  to  riparian  proprietors;  of  litigation  alike  endless,  wasteful, 
.and  demoralizing;  of  the  duty  of  water  for  different  soils  and  crops;  of  the  means, 
financial  and  engineering,  whereby  the  larger  undertakings  of  the  future  essential  to 
the  highest  good  may  be  carried  out,  to  the  end  that  nature's  precious  gift  of  the 
waters  shall  reclaim  the  utmost  acre,  sustain  the  utmost  family,  and  create  the  utmost 
home.  Above  all,  there  is  the  problem  of  providing  a  system  of  just  administration 
which  shall  secure  to  all  their  fair  proportion  of  that  element  without  which  their 
lands  are  worthless,  but  with  which  they  are  the  source  of  certain  income  and  endur- 
ing prosperity. 

No  locality  illustrates  more  fully  the  evils  inseparable  from  existing  laws  and 
customs  in  California  and  many  other  States  than  the  Honey  Lake  Basin.  So  it 
happens  that  in  this  typical  instance  we  may  study  the  general  problem  of  conquer- 
ing the  arid  wilderness  of  the  West  and  laying  broad  and  deep  the  foundations  of 
civilization. 

THE  WATER  SUPPLY  OF  HONEY  LAKE  BASIN. 

In  considering  the  irrigation  problem  of  this  region  we  are  confronted  at  the 
outset  by  the  total  absence  of  such  exact  information  as  should  form  the  basis  of 
anything  approaching  a  scientific  study  of  the  subject.  California  has  no  State 
engineer  and  has  not  had  for  many  years.  During  the  existence  of  that  office  there 
was  not  time  to  examine  the  conditions  of  this  remote  section,  since  settlement  and 
investment  flowed  to  more  famous  parts  of  the  State.  Until  the  present  inquiry 
was  begun  the  National  Government  made  no  effort  to  study  the  resources  and 
conditions  of  this  locality.  Under  these  circumstances  the  writer  has  no  choice 
except  to  make  use  of  such  scattered  and  superficial  information  as  may  be  had  from 
the  reports  of  private  engineers,  from  his  own  observation,  supplemented  by 
interviews  with  the  old  settlers,  and  from  such  facts  as  his  assistants  in  this  inquiry 
have  been  able  to  gather  in  a  short  time  during  the  past  summer.  Information  of 
this  kind  is  sure  to  be  conflicting  and  conclusions  based  upon  it  certain  to  be 
disputed,  but  the  effort  will  be  to  deal  with  the  subject  fairly  and  conservatively 
and  to  throw  as  much  light  as  possible  upon  the  complicated  questions  under  these 
disadvantageous  circumstances. 

The  most  comprehensive  report  upon  the  whole  subject  of  the  water  supply  of 
this  region  which  the  writer  has  been  able  to  obtain  is  that  prepared  by  William 
Ham.  Hall,  civil  engineer,  in  1895.  Mr.  Hall  served  as  State  engineer  of  California 
for  eight  years,  and  until  the  office  was  abolished.  Mr.  Hall's  visit  to  the  Honey 
Lake  region  was  a  brief  one,  and  it  is  only  fair  to  state  that  it  was  undertaken  for 
the  purpose  of  reporting  upon  a  private  enterprise,  rather  than  upon  the  broad 
public  question  which  we  are  now  considering.  Moreover,  he  obtained  his  estimates 
of  reservoir  capacities  and  records  of  stream  gaging  from  another  engineer,  as  was 
necessary  under  the  circumstances,  and  this  other  engineer  was  in  the  employ  of  the 
private  enterprise,  for  the  benefit  of  which  the  report  was  intended.  Albert  Halen, 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF   HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  75 

civil  engineer,  on  whom  he  chiefly  depended  for  such  information  as  lay  beyond  the 
reach  of  his  own  hasty  study,  is  a  professional  man  of  integrity  and  ability  and  of 
long  experience  in  this  locality. 

HONEY  LAKE  SERVES  TO  MEASURE  THE  SUPPLY. 

Mr.  Hall  based  his  estimates  of  the  water  supply  of  the  basin  upon  a  study  of 
Honey  Lake.  In  the  absence  of  exact  data,  verified  by  stream  gagings  extending 
over  a  long  period  of  years,  there  could  be  no  better  basis  for  a  rough  calculation. 
This  is  true  because  Honey  Lake  becomes  the  sink  of  all  the  waters  flowing  into  the 
valley  from  any  direction — Susan  River  and  its  tributaries  from  the  west,  Willow 
Creek  from  the  northwest,  Balls  Canyon  Creek  from  the  north  and  northeast,  and 
Long  Valley  Creek  from  the  south  and  southeast.  In  like  manner  various  smaller 
streams  and  large  quantities  of  storm  waters  reach  the  sink.  Thus  practically  all  the 
water  available  for  the  irrigation  of  the  valley  lands,  with  the  exception  of  that 
stored  in  Eagle  Lake  and  other  natural  reservoirs  at  a  considerable  elevation  above 
the  valley,  now  reaches  Honey  Lake,  and  it  is  here  that  we  can  best  form  an  estimate 
of  its  quantity. 

Mr.  Hall  estimates  the  area  of  Honey  Lake  at  its  normal  stage  as  60,000  acres.1 
He  says:  "It  has  been  known  to  carry  its  waters  to  a  materially  higher  plane  and 
consequent  greater  area  and  greater  volume  of  loss  per  year;  but  it  has  also  been  known 
to  recede  to  a  very  much  lower  level,  much  smaller  area,  and  consequent  less  volume 
of  loss  per  year."  These  variations  are  due,  of  course,  to  differences  in  precipitation; 
that  is  to  say,  in  wet  years,  and  especially  after  a  series  of  wet  years,  the  area  of  the 
lake  is  largely  increased,  while  in  dry  years  it  is  proportionately  decreased.  At  rare 
intervals  the  lake  has  been  known  to  go  almost  entirely  dry,  so  that  teams  were 
driven  across  it.  But  60,000  acres  of  water  surface  was  taken  by  Mr.  Hall  as  its 
normal  area,  and  upon  this  he  based  his  calculation  of  evaporative  loss.  It  is  clear, 
of  course,  that  whatever  amount  of  water  the  lake  may  lose  by  evaporation  and  still 
retain  its  normal  area  in  years  of  average  precipitation  may  safely  be  taken  as  the 
amount  which,  if  property  saved  and  distributed,  could  be  made  available  for  irri- 
gation. Mr.  Hall  says: 

It  loses  by  evaporation  the  equivalent  of  3J  feet  in  depth  from  this  surface  per  year,  so  that  as 
much  water  is  carried  into  the  atmosphere  from  it  as  would  cover  210,000,  say  200,000,  acres  of  land  1 
foot  in  depth,  or  as  would  amply  serve  in  irrigation,  allowing  for  loss  in  transit,  over  100,000  acres 
each  season.  *  *  *  The  evaporative  loss  furnishes  the  key  to  the  estimate,  for  it  ia  not  likely  that 
there  is  any  loss  by  seepage  or  percolation  from  it,  except  that  necessary  to  keep  the  soils  of  its  shores 
saturated,  which  is  insignificant  in  amount  when  compared  to  loss  by  evaporation,  as  they  do  not 
support  a  heavy  vegetation  and  are  not  of  percolative  character,  being  all  of  fine  alluvium  with  a  large 
portion  of  clayey  matter. 

Mr.  Hall's  estimate  of  loss  by  evaporation  is  conservative  and  rather  below  that 
which  has  been  demonstrated  elsewhere  under  similar  conditions.2  He  is  thoroughly 

1  United  States  Government  survey  shows  its  area  to  be  64,000  acres,  which  is  regarded  as 
correct  for  its  normal  stage. 

1  Experiments  of  the  California  State  engineering  department  over  a  period  of  five  years  show 
that  the  evaporation  from  Buena  Vista,  Kern,  and  Tulare  lakes,  which  closely  resemble  Honey  Lake 
in  general  character,  ranges  from  3.50  to  4.75  feet  of  depth  per  year.  The  evaporation  from  shallow 
fresh  water  lakes  of  Utah,  as  determined  by  United  States  irrigation  survey,  after  five  years'  Experi- 
ments, was  from  3  to  4  feet  per  year. 


76  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

familiar  with  world-wide  data  on  this  subject,  and  the  figures  he  has  given  as  the 
basis  of  available  water  supply  may  be  accepted  with  confidence. 

To  account  for  the  water  annually  flowing  into  Hone}7  Lake  and  lost  by  evapora- 
tion, Mr.  Hall  made  a  rough  estimate  of  the  water  yield  from  various  sources.  To 
assist  him  in  arriving  at  this  estimate  he  had  the  help  of  local  engineers  and  other 
observers,  and  the  benefit  of  his  own  study  of  water  courses  and  watersheds.  But  it 
is  at  best  only  an  approximate  figure  in  round  numbers  and  chiefly  valuable  as 
indicating,  in  a  general  way,  his  view  of  the  relative  importance  of  the  various  sources 
of  supply.  The  estimate  is  as  follows: 

Acre-feet. 

Susan  Kiver 100,000 

Willow1  and  Pete  creeks : 30, 000 

Balls  Canyon  Creek 29, 000 

Long  Valley  Creek 34,000 

All  other  sources 10, 000 

In  dealing  with  the  necessity  of  storage  Mr.  Hall  calculates  that  of  the  three 
irrigations  necessary — May,  June,  and  August,  respectively — the  first  might  be  taken 
wholly  from  the  natural  flow  of  the  stream,  while  the  second  must  be  drawn  mostly 
from  storage,  and  the  third  entirely  from  that  source.  The  chief  value  of  Mr.  Hall's 
report  for  our  purpose  is  the  fact  that  he  furnishes  us  with  scientific  authority  for 
the  statement  that  100,000  acres  may  be  irrigated,  in  addition  to  the  amount  already 
in  cultivation,  from  the  waters  which  now  flow  uselessly  into  Honey  Lake  Valley  and 
are  there  lost  by  evaporation.  If  we  put  the  value  of  the  product  of  an  acre  of  land  in 
this  valley  as  low  as  $10  this  waste  of  waters  represents  an  annual  loss  to  the  com- 
munity of  $1,000,000.  But  this  figure  does  not  begin  to  measure  the  social  and 
economic  gain  which  could  be  realized  by  the  proper  conservation  of  the  water  sup- 
pi}7.  As  the  character  of  the  streams  is  torrential,  and  the  perennial  flow  far  below 
the  needs  of  agriculture  when  any  great  area  shall  be  under  cultivation,  storage  must 
be  availed  of  upon  an  extensive  scale. 

CHARACTER    OF    WATERSHED. 

The  most  painstaking  estimate  of  the  watershed  tributary  to  Honey  Lake  Basin 
is  that  contained  in  Mr.  Hall's  report,  and  compiled  by  him,  with  the  assistance  of 
Albert  Halen,  civil  engineer.  This  is  as  follows: 

Watershed  trilmtary  to  the  Honey  Lake  Rosin. 

Square  miles. 

Susan  River,  mountains  to  mouth  of  canyon 256. 8 

Mountain  side  south  of  Susan  River  Valley , .  25.  6 

Hills  south  of  Susan  River  Valley 20. 0 

Hills  north  of  Susan  River  Valley 36. 2 

Susan  River  Valley,  to  mouth  of  Willow  Creek 47. 4 

386.0 


Willow  Creek,  above  Pete  Creek , 101.0 

Below  Pete  Creek 10.3 

Pete  Creek,  exclusive  of  Horse  Lake  watershed 74. 8 


186.1 


•Of  the  amount  credited  to  Willow  Creek,  5,000  to  7,500  acre-feet  are  due  to  the  leakage  from 
Eagle  Lake,  appearing  at  the  head  of  the  creek  in  the  form  of  springs. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  77 

Square  miles. 

Horse  Lake  and  its  drainage  area 114.5 

Balls  Canyon,  with  Snowstorm  and  Secret  Valley  creeks 272.0 

Long  Valley  Creek,  exclusive  of  watershed  of  White  Alkali  Lake 230. 0 


Small  streams  and  canyons,  to  liasin  direct: 

Hills  north,  Shaffer  Peak  to  Hot  Springs  Peak  and  down  ridge  west  of  Ske- 
daddle divide 64. 2 

Hills  northwest  of  lake,  Baxter  Creek  shed 19. 0 

Mountain  side  southwest  of  lake 53. 6 


Total 1,210.9 

Honey  Lake  and  the  basin  lands 374. 8 

Grand  total 1,585.7 

The  character  of  the  watershed  i,s  by  no  means  uniform.  The  Susan  River 
watershed  belongs  to  the  first  class  in  water-yielding  efficiency,  because  it  receives 
the  largest  and  most  regular  snowfall,  and  is  clothed  in  forests  which  insure  the 
gradual  melting  of  the  winter's  accumulation.  The  same  is  true  of  the  mountains 
lying  to  the  south  of  the  valley,  including  the  watershed  of  Thompson  Creek.  With 
the  exception  of  the  Pine  Creek  neighborhood,  tributary  to  Eagle  Lake,  the  vast 
remaining  watershed  is  far  from  first  class.  It  varies  a  good  deal  and  there  are 
seasons  when,  in  consequence  of  unusually  heavy  snows,  it  sends  enormous  floods 
through  creeks  and  canyons  to  the  final  sink  in  Honey  Lake.  But  in  ordinary  years 
these  barren  hills  possess  small  value  from  the  standpoint  of  the  water  yield. 

STORAGE  SITES. 

The  problem  of  water  storage  to  supplement  the  natural  flow  of  streams  presents 
in  this  region  three  remarkable  features  seldom  found  in  conjunction.  First,  there 
are  numerous  good-si/ed  reservoir  sites  where  the  engineer  has  but  to  assist  nature 
by  inclosing  the  outlet  with  dams  and  headgates,  and  reaching  out  low  levees  on 
either  hand  to  effect  their  completion.  The  cost  is  so  low  as  to  make  them  entirely 
practicable  and  their  size  and  location  such  that  they  may  be  utilized  one  at  a  time, 
and  the  system  gradually  extended  to  meet  the  growing  needs  of  the  country. 
Second,  these  natural  reservoir  sites  are  so  distributed  as  practically  to  surround  the 
valley  and  permit  different  parts  of  it  to  enjoy  independent  supplies.  Third,  there 
are  three  small  lakes  and  one  large  one,  which  only  require  to  be  tapped  to  serve 
important  uses.  When  these  simple  conditions  are  compared  with  those  prevailing 
in  many  other  parts  of  the  arid  region,  where  great  storage  works  must  be  constructed 
before  a  single  acre  of  land  can  be  irrigated,  they  are  seen  to  furnish  extraordinary 
advantages  to  this  locality. 

The  utilization  of  these  striking  opportunities  for  storage  has  begun,  but  the 
work  is  yet  in  its  infancy.  What  has  been  attempted  and  what  accomplished  in 
the  way  of  irrigation  development,  together  with  the  difficulties  encountered,  will  be 
sketched  elsewhere  in  this  report;  but  in  this  place  it  is  proper  to  say  that  of  the 
many  reservoirs  which  have  been  projected  from  time  to  time  on  Susan  River,  in 
the  mountains  lying  to  the  west  of  the  valley,  two  have  been  partly  constructed  and 


78  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

are  now  in  use,  while  two  natural  lakes,  Caribou  and  Silver,  have  been  tapped  to 
more  or  less  advantage.  Preliminary  work  has  been  done  at  other  sites.  The  most 
effective  storage  yet  accomplished  in  the  vallej1  is  represented  by  Lake  Leavitt, 
which  lies  off  the  stream,  with  which  it  is  connected  by  a  canal,  and  is  located  in  the 
immediate  neighborhood  of  the  land  it  supplies.  North  of  the  valley  there  are  also 
opportunities  for  storage,  notably  on  Balls  Canyon,  and  here  two  small  reservoirs 
are  already  in  use.  If  the  legal  and  financial  conditions  surrounding  irrigation 
enterprise  in  this  locality  were  as  favorable  as  the  physical  environment,  there 
would  be  a  much  longer  record  of  accomplishment  in  the  way  of  storage. 

EAGLE   LAKE. 

Eagle  Lake,  one  of  the  most  beautiful  sheets  of  water  in  California,  lies  at  an 
altitude  of  5,115  feet  25  miles  northwest  of  Honey  Lake  Valley.  It  is  flanked  on 
one  side  by  the  forests  of  the  Sierra  and  on  the  other  by  barren  hillsides  and  low 
mountains.  The  area  of  this  lake  is  nearly  28,000  acres  and  it  is  of  great  depth.  As 
its  elevation  is  more  than  1,000  feet  above  the  irrigable  lands  of  Honey  Lake  Vallev, 
it  naturally  suggests  itself  as  a  feasible  supply  for  the  reclamation  of  a  great  area. 
More  than  once  enterprises  have  been  organized  for  the  purpose  of  tapping  this 
great  natural  reservoir,  by  means  of  a  long  tunnel  through  the  lava  dike  which 
separates  it  from  the  head  of  Willow  Creek  Valley.  When  these  enterprises  have 
been  in  progress  Eagle  Lake  has  been  advertised  as  a  reliable  water  supply  for  at 
least  100,000  acres.  On  this  subject  there  are  two  opinions  and,  as  in  any  event  this 
lake  must  sometime  be  an  important  factor  in  the  reclamation  of  Honey  Lake  Valley 
to  the  largest  extent,  they  may  properly  be  mentioned  here. 

It  is  generally  conceded  that  the  level  of  the  lake  is  practically  stationary,  except 
that  it  rises  somewhat  after  a  series  of  wet  years  and  falls  correspondingly  after  a 
series  of  dry  years.  This  would  seem  clearly  to  indicate  that,  on  the  average,  it 
receives  no  more  water  annually  than  it  loses  by  evaporation  and  leakage.  It  is 
generally  admitted  that  Willow  Creek  receives  about  7,500  miner's  inches  by  the 
leakage  of  water  from  the  lake  through  the  natural  dike  of  lava.  There  are  no  other 
large  leakages  that  are  definitely  known,  but  many  people  believe  that  numerous 
creeks  and  springs  tributary  to  Honey  Lake  really  owe  their  existence  to  the  same 
source.  The  watershed  of  the  lake  is  quite  small  and  ridiculously  disproportionate 
to  the  amount  of  service  which  is  expected  of  the  supply  from  this  source.  But  in 
answer  to  this  indisputable  statement  it  is  said  by  the  strong  believers  in  the  project 
that  the  lake  is  fed  by  underground  springs  of  enormous  capacity.  When  they  are 
asked  to  explain  why,  if  such  is  the  fact,  the  lake  does  not  rise  constantly  higher 
and  higher  until  it  shall  finally  overflow,  or  at  least  largely  increase  the  pressure 
upon  the  points  of  leakage,  they  answer  only  with  the  reiteration  of  their  faith  that 
Eagle  Lake  is  practically  inexhaustible  and  will  furnish  water  for  the  whole  country. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  skeptics  regard  Eagle  Lake  as  a  great  delusion.  They 
say  it  is  a  body  of  water  with  no  visible  outlet  except  the  subterranean  leakage  into 
Willow  Creek,  and  that  if  it  were  tapped  by  a  tunnel  20  feet  below  its  present  level  it. 
would  supply  a  large  area  for  a  few  years,  until  drawn  down  to  the  level  of  the  tunnel. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  79 

and  thereafter  furnish  only  so  much  water  regularly  as  might  be  saved  from  evapora- 
tion by  decreasing  the  area  of  its  surface.  They  calculate  that  this  would  be  equal 
to  the  irrigation  of  about  5,000  acres  of  land.  If  no  more  than  this  could  be  irrigated 
the  cost  of  the  project  would  be  prohibitory.  They  further  say  that  the  matter  of 
watershed  and  under-ground  springs  does  not  enter  into  the  question  at  all,  since  it  is 
perfectly  plain  that  no  more  water  flows  into  this  land-locked  lake  each  year  than 
escapes  by  evaporation  and  leakage;  otherwise  its  level  must  rise  steadily  year  after 
year  until  its  water  finds  an  outlet.  They  claim  that  there  is  but  a  single  chance  that 
the  advocates  of  the  project  may  be  right,  and  that  that  chance  lie's  in  the  possibility 
that  by  drawing  down  the  level  of  the  lake  20  feet  very  great  leakages  may  be  stopped, 
and  the  water  so  saved  taken  into  the  tunnel  and  thence  to  the  lands  in  the  valley 
below.  The  following  simple  illustration  shows  the  skeptical  point  of  view:  Suppose 
you  had  a  tank  of  a  certain  capacity  and  that  the  inflow  of  water  at  one  side  was 
exactly  balanced  by  the  outflow  at  the  other,  so  that  the  level  of  the  water  in  the  tank 
remained  always  about  the  same.  Suppose  that  you  now  put  in  a  new  pipe  to  tap 
the  tank  1  foot  below  the  surface  of  the  water.  Would  not  the  new  pipe  necessarily 
draw  down  the  water  to  its  own  level?  If  so,  would  the  pipe  thereafter  draw  any 
water  at  all?  Certainly  not,  unless  there  were  leaks  in  your  tank  between  the  mouth 
of  the  new  pipe  and  the  former  water  level. 

Popular  opinion  in  the  locality  is  strongly  on  the  side  of  those' who  believe  Eagle 
Lake  to  be  an  inexhaustible  supply,  fed  from  mysterious  sources,  which  will  be  equal 
to  any  demands  that  may  be  made  upon  it  under  an}7  and  all  circumstances.  Popular 
faith  in  it  possesses  almost  the  quality  of  a  superstition.  Scientific  opinion,  on  the 
contrary,  regards  it  as  a  delusion,  though  there  are  some  local  engineers  who  hold 
the  popular  view,  justifying  it  on  the  ground  that  large  leakages  will  be  stopped 
when  the  lake  is  drawn  down  by  the  proposed  tunnel,  and  that  the  water  so  saved, 
together  with  that  which  everybody  admits  would  be  saved  from  evaporation  by 
decreasing  the  surface  of  the  lake,  would  suffice  for  the  irrigation  of  a  very  large 
area.  It  is  a  question  which  can  never  be  satisfactorily  settled  until  the  experiment 
of  the  tunnel  is  actually  made. 

Wholly  aside  from  the  merits  of  this  controversy,  Eagle  Lake  is  sure  to  be  a 
factor  in  the  future  and  to  serve  a  purpose  of  the  highest  utility  in  connection  with 
the  largest  reclamation  of  the  valley  below.  Whatever  else  it  is  or  is  not,  it  is  a 
great  natural  reservoir  which  might  safely  be  drawn  upon  in  dry  years  to  save 
millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  crops  if  the  entire  valley  were  in  cultivation.  It  could 
safely  be  drawn  upon  for  this  purpose  one  year  in  ten,  and  probably  three  years  in 
ten.  This  would  be  practicable  provided  the  lake  were  made  a  part  of  a  great  system 
of  irrigation  depending  for  its  regular  supply  upon  streams  and  reservoirs  elsewhere 
in  the  basin  which  are  annually  reenforced  by  the  year's  precipitation.  In  good 
years  these  other  sources  would  furnish  irrigation  for  the  entire  valley,  but  the 
history  of  the  country  shows  that  good  years  can  not  always  be  depended  upon. 
There  is  always  one  dry  year  in  every  ten,  generally  two  dry  years,  sometimes  three. 
In  such  years  the  reserve  available  from  Eagle  Lake  would  save  the  entire  valley 
and,  charged  as  a  capitalized  cost  against  the  whole,  pay  good  dividends  alike  to  the 
money  invested  and  to  the  community. 


80 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 
RECENT  WATER  MEASUREMENTS. 


Of  exact  data  bearing  on  the  question  of  water  supply  nothing  is  available  except 
a  few  measurements  made  on  Willow  Creek  and  Susan  River  in  the  spring  and  summer 
of  1899  and  the  summer  of  1900.  These  are  as  follows: 

Stream  gagings  in  Honey  Lake  Basin. 


Stream. 

Date. 

Place. 

Discharge. 

Gager. 

Willow  Creek  

Apr.  18,1899 
do  

Mouth  of  creek 

Cu.fl. 
per  sec. 

24.50 
24.50 
27.68 
27.66 
2ft.  40 
24.39 
20.66 
20.66 
139.30 
114.60 
37.20 
32.  98 
34.26 
14.46 
40.66 
34.27 
23.45 
32.99 

31.08 
30.28 
11.46 
6.92' 
29.84 
27.44 
14.65 
17.97 

Miner's 
inches. 

1,225 
1,225 
1,384 
1,383 
1,270 
1,219 
1,033 
1,033 
6,965 
5,730 
1,860 
1,649 
1,713 
723 
2,033 
1,713 
1,172 
1,649 

1,654 
1,514 
573 
346 
1,492 
1,372 
732 
898 

Albert  Halen. 
W.  D.  Minekler. 
Albert  Halen. 
W.  D.  Minckler. 
Albert  Halen. 
W.  D.  Minckler. 
Albert  Halen. 
W.  D.  Minckler. 
Albert  Halen. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
W.  D.  Minckler. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 

Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
DO. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 

Do  

Do  

Apr.  23,1899 
Apr.  24,1899 
June    4,1899 
do     • 

Mouth  of  creek  

Do. 

Do  

Do 

Do. 

June  11,1899 
do  

do 

Do  

Susan  River  . 

Apr.  18,1899 
Apr.  23,1899 

Dam  near  mouth  of  Willow  Creek  .  .  . 
do  

Do  

Do  

June    4,1899 

do  

Do  
Do  
Do  

June  11,1899 
do  

Apr    18  1899 

do  
Below  dam  
do      

Do  
Do 

Apr.   23,1899 
June  11,1899 

do  

Do 

do 

Susan     River,    North    and 
South  branches. 
Susan  River,  South  Branch.  . 
Do  
Susan  River,  North  Branch.  . 
Do  

June  11,1899 

Apr.  24,1899 
June   4,1899 
Apr.     4,  1899 
June    4,1899 
Apr.  18,1899 
Apr.  23,1899 
June    4,1899 
June  11,1899 

do  

do 

do     

Tanners  Slough  
Do  

Do    ... 

Do  

Having  considered  the  physical  resources  of  the  country,  with  special  attention 
to  the  water  supply,  we  are  now  prepared  to  sketch  what  has  been  accomplished  in 
the  way  of  their  utilization  and  to  observe  how  existing  laws  and  customs  have  influ- 
enced, for  good  or  evil,  the  development  of  the  irrigation  industry  in  this  typical 
valley  of  the  arid  region.  This  involves  the  consideration  of  the  institutions  of  Cali- 
fonra  in  so  far  as  they  relate  to  irrigation,  since  the  Honey  Lake  Basin  is  governed 
by  the  statutes  of  the  State  to  which  it  belongs. 

APPROPRIATION  AND  DISTRIBUTION  OF  WATER. 

The  groat  fabric  of  the  California  irrigation  industry  rests  upon  a  slender  foun- 
dation of  organic  law.  This  is  supported  by  a  considerable  body  of  judicial  decisions 
which  have  grown  up  during  the  past  half  century  and  which,  though  often  vague 
aild  conflicting,  have  contributed  much  that  is  vital  to  this  side  of  the  economic  life 
of  the  people.  In  subsequent  pages  we  shall  see  the  sources  of  these  laws  and  of 


IRRIGATION'     I'ROHLKMS    OK    HONKV     LAKK     HASIN.  SI 

the  decisions  based  upon  them,  and  observe  how  great  a  contrast  they  present  to 
laws  which  in  other  States  and  countries  have  furnished  a  secure  foundation  for 
water  rights.  But  in  this  division  of  the  report  it  is  designed  only  to  show  what 
the  laws  are  and  to  trace  their  influence  through  the  history  of  one  important  valley 
to  which  they  have  been  applied. 

The  statutes  say  that  "the  right  to  the  use  of  running  water  (lowing  in  a  river 
or  stream  or  down  a  canyon  or  ravine  may  be  acquired  by  appropriation."  This 
appropriation  must  be  for  some  beneficial  or  useful  purpose.  The  right  ceases  when 
the  appropriator.  or  his  successors  in  interest,  ceases  to  apply  the  waters  in  this  way. 
But  the  person  entitled  to  the  use  may  change  the  place  of  diversion,  if  others  are 
not  injured  by  such  change,  and  may  also  change  the  place  of  use.  Priority  in  time 
gives  priority  in  right.  Appropriations  must  be  followed  within  sixty  days  by 
actual  work;  otherwise  they  lapse  and  the  water  which  had  been  claimed  may  be 
appropriated  by  others.  The  rights  of  riparian  proprietors  are  expressly  exempted 
from  the  operations  of  this  law  of  appropriation. 

As  the  foundation  of  any  system  of  administrative  laws  which  may  be  adopted 
in  the  future  is  the  method  of  establishing  rights  to  the  stream,  it  is  well  worth 
while  to  reproduce  in  full  the  brief  regulations  governing  the  actual  process  of 
appropriation.  They  are  as  follows: 

Sue.  1415.  A  person  desiring;  to  appropriate  water  must  post  a  notice,  in  writing,  in  a  conspicuous 
place  at  the  point  of  intended  diversion,  stating  therein: 

(1)  That  lie  claims  the  water  there  flowing  to  the  extent  of  (giving  the  number)  inches,  measured 
under  a  4-inch  pressure. 

(2)  The  purpose  for  which  he  claims  it  and  the  place  of  intended  use. 

(3)  The  means  by  which  he  intends  to  divert  it,  and  the  size  of  the  flume,  ditch,  pipe,  or  aqueduct 
in  which  he  intends  to  divert  it. 

A  copy  of  the  notice  must,  within  ten  days  after  it  is  posted,  be  recorded  in  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  posted. 

SEC.  1421.  The  recorder  of  each  county  must  keep  a  book,  in  which  he  must  record  the  notices 
provided  for  in  this  title. 

This  is  the  entire  law  governing  the  method  of  appropriation  and  of  recording 
the  claims  upon  which  property  worth  tens  of  millions  of  dollars,  considering  the 
State  as  a  whole,  is  based.  It  will  be  observed  that  there  is  no  provision  for  the 
exercise  of  public  authority  over  these  appropriations.  It  is  also  true  that  there  is 
no  public  authority  to  which  the  intending  appropriator  may  apply  to  ascertain 
whether  there  is  any  unused'  water  in  the  stream  to  which  he  may  properly  lay 
claim.  The  case  presents  a  striking  contrast  to  the  provision  under  which  citizens 
may  acquire  or  "appropriate"  land  from  the  public  domain.  All  such  lands  have 
been  properly  surveyed  and  mapped.  The  public  authority  has  made  it  easy  to  learn 
their  location,  extent,  and  general  character.  There  is  a  central  office  at  Washington, 
with  numerous  branches  throughout  the  region  in  which  the  public  domain  is  located, 
which  keeps  all  these  records,  and  no  citizen  need  involve  the  risk  of  expenditure  for 
improvements  before  knowing  whether  there  is  any  land  open  to  entry,  or  whether 
it  lias  all  been  claimed  and  occupied. 

Such  legal  protection  for  citizens  is  far  more  necessary  in  the  case  of  public 
water  than  in  the  case  of  public  land.  This  is  so  because  a  man  may  often  see  with 

23856— No.  100—01 6 


82  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

his  own  eyes  that  certain  lands  have  been  claimed  anil  improved  in  accordance  with 
the  law,  while  nothing  short  of  a  scientific  study  can  demonstrate  whether  or  not  there 
is  a  surplus  of  water  in  the  stream  available  for  new  appropriations.  On  this  subject 
there  is  always  a  difference  of  opinion.  The  old  resident  is  sure  there  is  no  surplus 
water,  while  the  newcomer  is  equally  certain  that  the  present  supply  is  being-  wasted 
and  that  he  has  a  perfect  right  to  claim  his  share  and  proceed  to  create  his  homo. 
There  can  be  no  decision  rendered  between  these  conflicting  opinions  and  interests 
until  the  matter  has  been  brought  to  the  test  of  actual  experience.  This  is  when  the 
new  ditch  has  been  built,  at  great  or  little  cost,  as  the  case  may  be.  When  we  come 
to  consider  the  matter  of  lawsuits  resulting  from  these  conditions  we  shall  see  how 
even  this  costly  test  often  results  in  decisions  which  do  not  decide,  but  merely  involve 
all  the  interested  parties  in  financial  loss  and  vexation  of  spirit.  The  fact  that  this 
law  provides  no  method  by  which  the  intending  appropriates  may  know  whether 
there  is  surplus  water  which  he  can  legally  claim,  and,  if  so,  the  amount  of  it,  is  the 
first  great  evil  we  encounter  in  considering  irrigation  development,  but  is  by  no 
means  the  only  failure  in  the  law  of  appropriation. 

The  law  says  that  the  appropriate!'  "must  post  a  notice,  in  writing,  in  a  con- 
spicuous place  at  the  point  of  intended  diversion."  Now,  it  may  happen,  frequent!  v 
does  happen,  that  "the  conspicuous  place1'  at  which  it  is  desired  to  divert  the  water 
is  in  some  willow  thicket  at  the  lonely  bend  of  the  stream,  where  there  are  only  jack 
rabbits  and  coyotes  to  see  the  notice  so  posted.  Streams  are  not  diverted  in  the 
main  streets  of  populous  villages,  nor  even  on  the  main  traveled  roads  of  the 
country.  The  water  is  generally  desired  to  be  taken  out  at  a  point  somewhat  remote 
from  the  cultivated  districts  where  men  have  their  habitations.  It  must  be  taken  at 
a  sufficient  elevation  to  enable  the  water  to  flow  upon  lands  which,  at  the  point  to  be 
cultivated,  lie  considerably  above  the  stream.  This  stealthy  method  of  appropriation 
is,  then,  open  to  the  very  serious  objection  that  a  projected  enterprise  which  may  be 
of  great  importance  to  the  community  can  be  initiated  with  all  the  privacy  that  a 
bank  robber  might  desire  for  his  operations.  The  further  provision  for  placing 
the  notices  of  appropriations  in  a  book  kept  by  the  county  recorder  helps  the  matter 
very  little.  Such  records  are  of  course  open  to  public  scrutiny,  but  they  are  seldom 
scrutinized.  The  recorder  himself  has  no  function  in  the  matter  except  to  write  the 
notices  in  his  book.  He  has  no  means  of  knowing  whether  the  new  claim  is  justifiable 
and  no  authority  to  divulge  the  information  if  he  possessed  it.  Neither  he  nor  any 
other  official  representing  the  people  has  any  means*  of  knowing  whether  the  pro- 
jected work  will  be  carried  out,  nor  whether,  in  case  it  be  carried  out,  it  will  be  done 
in  a  way  which  accords  with  good  public  policy.  Neither  is  there  any  method 
provided  for  ascertaining  if  projected  works  have  actually  been  constructed.  In 
a  general  way  the  public  learns,  after  a  time,  that  a  man  has.  built  his  ditch  or  has 
given  it  up,  but  their  only  means  of  knowing  this  is  by  their  own  observation  or  by 
hearsay. 

The  law  says  the  appropriate!1  must  state  the  means  by  which  he  purposes  to 
divert  the  water  and  the  size  of  the  proposed  works.  He  must  also  apply  it  to  a 
useful  or  beneficial  purpose.  The  law  goes  no  further.  It  provides  no  method  by 
which  the  public  may  ascertain  that  he  has  taken  only  the  amount  of  water  to  which 
he  laid  claim,  or  that  he  has  applied  it  beneficially.  All  this  is  left  to  litigation. 


IRRIGATION    PROHLKMS    OK    HONEY    LAKK    HASIN.  83 

The  whole  subject  is  treated  as  if  it  were  a  matter  of  no  particular  consequence 
and  as  if  there  were  no  more  need  of  safeguarding  the  water  supply  than  of  govern- 
ing the  use  of  the  air  we  breathe. 

THE   LAW   OF   APPKOPBIATION   AT   WORK. 

The  first  irrigation  ditch  in  Hone}'  Lake  Valley  was  Imilt  in  1854.  The  notiee 
of  claim  was  as  follows:1 

I,  the  undersigned,  claim  the  privilege  to  take  all  the  water  out  of  Smith  Creek  (now  Piute 
Creek)  at  the  junction  of  the  two  forks  where  the  stake  stands.  I  shall  build  the  dam  sonic  (>  feet 
high  and  carry  the  water  along  the  South  Hill  to  the  emigrant  road. 

ISAAC  Roor: 

August,  A.  D.  1854. 

Recorded  this  1st  day  of  May,  1856. 

While  it  is  thus  apparent  that  water  ha.s  been  in  use  for  irrigation  in  this  valley 
since  1854,  and  while  the  count}'  government  was  organized  in  1864,  a  search  o£  the 
records  reveals  the  fact  that  the  first  claim  filed  and  recorded  in  accordance  with 
the  law  is  dated  April  27,  1872.  It  is  the  claim  of  D.  C.  Hall  for  200  inches  of  Gold 
Run.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  during  the  interval  of  eighteen  years  between  the 
filing  made  by  Isaac  Roop  and  the  formation  of-Jfic  county  government  many  appro- 
priations were  made,  of  which  several  were  put  into  use.  Doubtless  the,  same  was 
true  of  the  period  between  1864-  and  the  first  legal  record  which  was  filed  in  1S72.2 

Taking  the  two  periods  together,  there  were  twenty-six  years  more  than  a 
quarter  of  a  century — when  the  streams  were  being  used  without  any  legal  record  of 
appropriations.  It  is  possible  that  the  county  records  were  destroyed  by  some  of  the 
numerous  fires  which  have  afflicted  Susanville;  but,  as  the  record  is  intact  for  the  last 
twenty -eight  'years,  it  seems  more  likely  that  lack  of  official  data  bearing  on  early 
appropriations  is  due  to  the  looseness  of  the  law  and  the  slight  significance  which 
was  attached  to  it  by  the  public  mind.  Vested  interests  of  considerable  value  must 
have  been  created  by  the  use  of  the  waters  during  the  long  period  about  which  the 
official  records  are  absolutely  silent. 

We  have  now  reached  the  point  where  we  may  study  with  profit  the  record  of 
appropriations  on  streams  entering  Honey  Lake  Basin  and  observe  what  light  they 
throw  upon  the  operation  of  the  California  irrigation  law  and  the  necessities  of  future 
development.  For  this  purpose  the  voluminous  record  has  been  carefully  searched 
and  the  entire  data  placed  at  the  disposal  of  the  author  of  this  report,  thanks  to  Prof. 
J.  M.  Wilson  and  his  painstaking  assistants.  When  these  appropriations  are  viewed 
as  a  whole  it  is  easy  to  see  the  risks  involved  in  the  irresponsible  methods  prescribed 
by  the  law  and  in  the  total  absence  of  any  system  of  administration  for  the  protection 
of  the  public. 

By  far  the  most  important  stream  entering  the  valley  is  Susan  River,  draining 
the  rich  watershed  created  by  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains.  As 
we  have  seen,  it  is  estimated  that  about  one-half  of  the  entire  drainage  entering  into 

1  History  of  Plumas,  Lassen,  and  Sierra  Counties.     San  Francisco:  Farias  &  Smith,  1882. 

2 This  is  evidenced  by  some  of  the  records  of  claims.  One  has  the  note:  "Used  the  water  for 
-everal  years  before  posting  notice."  A  more  remarkable  instance  is  a  filing  recorded  Hay  10,  1898, 
which  says:  "Have  used  the  water  since  1862,"  thirty-six  years  before  tiling. 


84 


IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


Honey  Lake  comes  from  this  source.  But,  oddly  enough,  we  shall  discover  that  the 
total  claims  to  water  from  the  chief  stream  of  the  valley  have  been  much  smaller 
than  those  made  upon  several  lesser  streams.  Indeed,  there  is  one  water  course  which 
contributes  to  Honey  Lake  only  about  one-third  as  much  water  as  Susan  River, 
yet  over  six  times  as  much  water  has  been  claimed  from  the  smaller  us  from  the 
larger  stream.  It  is  thus  apparent  that  the  amount  of  actual  supply  has  no  logical 
relation  to  the  extent  of  claims.  How  could  it  be  otherwise  in  a  State  which  makes 
no  provision  for  the  measurement  of  its  waters  and  leaves  its  people  to  scramble 
blindly  for  the  most  precious  of  all  natural  elements  in  an  arid  land? 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  no  provision  in  the  law  for  the  cancellation  of  claims. 
They  lapse  if  not  applied  with  due  diligence  to  a  beneficial  use,  but  there  is  no  legal 
requirement  calling  for  a  record  of  such  lapses.  In  the  second  place,  as  has  been 
observed  in  foregoing  comments  pn  the  law,  there  is  no  legal  means  of  knowing  that 
any  appropriator  has  used  the  entire  amount  of  water  that  he  claimed.  It  is  notorious 
that  in  California  appropriators  make  no  attempt  to  claim  with  even  approximate 
accuracy  the  amount  of  water  they  need.  The  only  rule  is  to  be  sure  to  make  the 
claim  large  enough.  This  generally  results  in  "claiming, the  earth,"  so  to  speak. 

CLAIMS  ON   SUSAN   RIVER. 

The  claims  to  waters  of  Susan  River  filed  from  April  27,  1872,  to  April  6, 1900, 
were  as  follows: 

Filings  on  Susan  River,  1872-1900. 


Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Hitter's 

inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner1! 

inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

200 

2,000 

600 

250 

75 

500 

20,000 

200 

500 

300 

300 

500 

500 

400 

100,000 

100,000 

10,000 

10,000 

2,000 

300 

200 

10,000 

1,400 

500 

10,000 

1,000 

10,000 

400 

2,000 

300 

40 

2,000 

144 

200,000 

1,000 

5,000 

500 

600 

250 

300' 

1,500 

300 

10,000 

500 

500 

150 

40 

50 

500 

2,000 

600 

10,000 

50,000 

10,000 

2,000 
300 
200 

500 
1,000 
600 

100 
300 
300 

500 
300 
300 

300 
100 
300 

100,000 
6,000 
220,000 

40 
20,000 
200 

100 
10,000 
10,000 

200 

955,039 

2,000 

The  above  total  does  not  represent  the  entire  claims  on  Susan  River,  however. 
The  total  number  of  claims  was  92,  while  only  80  are  included  in  the  table.  This 
discrepancy  is  due  to  the  fact  that  12  appropriations  were  couched  in  such  indefinite 
terms  that  they  could  not  be  reduced  to  tabular  form.  As  these  indefinite  appropria- 
tions reveal  the  utter  laxness  of  California  irrigation  practice  it  is  well  worth  while 
to  reproduce  some  of  the  more  striking  ones: 

W.  B.  Sargeant  (1873)  claimed  "all  surplus  water  (in  the  river)  over  and  above 
the  2,000  inches  claimed  by  A.  A.  Smith." 

Z.  N.  Spalding  (1878)  claimed  "the  water  taken  out"  of  Piute  Creek,  a  tributary 
of  the  Susan.  There  was  nothing  to  indicate  how  much  he  had  "taken  out"  or 
desired  to  take  out. 


IRRIGATION    PROW.KMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN. 


85 


J.  H.  Slater  (ls.s;5)  claimed  "the  waters  in  Caribou  and  Silver  lakes  and 
tributaries"  without  taking  the  trouble  to  estimate  the  quantity  of  these  waters  or 
to  state  the  amount  he  needed  and  expected  to  apply  to  a  beneficial  use. 

D.  W.  Ridenour  and  Charles  Lawson  (1887)  claimed  "all  water  here  flowing  in 
Gold  Run  Creek  (tributary  to  the  Susan)  at  any  and  all  times  of  the  year,"  notwith- 
standing the  fact  that  there  were  13  prior  claims  to  the  same  stream,  of  which  one 
had  been  made  fourteen  years  before. 

Elliott  Winchester  claimed  "one-fourth  interest  in  all  the  water  flowing  into  the 
ditch  (Batchelder  &  Adams),  which  carries  about  3,000  inches." 

D.  C.  Hyer  (1893)  appropriated  "all  the  water  here  flowing  and  also  the  surplus 
water  of  Susan  River  at  the  .point  where  this  notice  is  posted,"  thereby  bidding 
defiance  to  a  multitude  of  prior  appropriate rs  and  to  the  claims iof  posterity. 

We  have  reproduced  only  a  part  of  what  may  be  termed  the  eccentricities  of 
Susan  River  appropriations,  but  these  will  be  enough  to  throw  a  strong  light  on  the 
workings  of  the  law. 

CLAIMS   TO   WILLOW    CREEK. 

Willow  Creek  reaches  Honey  Lake  Basin  from  the  north  and  is  a  stream  of  much 
value  to  the  community.  It  is  estimated  that  its  annual  volume  is  about  one-third 
that  of  Susan  River,  but  we  shall  see  that  the  amount  of  water  flowing  in  the  stream 
has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  quantity  which  the  public  will  claim  from  it 
under  the  California  system.  Willow  Creek  has  a  very  fair  watershed,  but  it  is 
generally  believed  that  it  draws  its  chief  supply  from  leakage  of  Eagle  Lake.  The 
list  of  claims  is  as  follows: 

mi  Willow  Creek,  1872-1899. 


Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Miner's 
fnctot. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Mi,,,  ft 
in,  'he*. 

\'in,  ;'.-• 

inches. 

Minrr'H 
tnehn. 

5,000 

2,000 

•£> 

100,000 

110,000 

200.000 

'    GOO 

3,000 

3,000 

2,000 

200,000 

10,000 

600 

20 

220 

10,000 

30,000 

250 

4,000 

1,000 

10,000 

2,000 

200,000 

5,000 

2,500 
100 
600 

800 
3,000 
4,000,000 

10,000 
100 
2,000 

100,000 
1,000,000 
100,000 

5,000 
5,000 
200,000 

10,000 

6.338,535 

800 

20 

Those  who  searched  the  records  of  Willow  Creek  claims  annotated  the  claims 
of  4,000,000  inches  as  follows:  "  Fortunately  for  Eagle  Lake  and  Willow  Creek,  and 
for  those  residents  of  Honey  Lake  Valley  who  could  not  swim,  this  enterprise  was 
never  carried  out." 

The  indefinite  claims  in  this  district  include  that  of  John  Ruf  and  Adam  Jakobs 
(1873),  who  modestly  claimed  "all  water  of  Willow  Creek."  This  did  not  prevent 
L.  Knudson  and  others  (1874)  from  also  claiming  "all  waters  of  Willow  Creek,  being 
2,000  inches,  more  or  less." 


86 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


BALLS   CANYON    CLAIMS. 

The  stream  which  flows  through  Balls  Canyon  is  fed  by  Snowstorm  and  Secret 
Valley  creeks,  and  during  most  of  the  year  supplies  comparatively  little  water.  Its 
watershed  consists  mostly  of  barren  hills  and  mountains  which  have  no  capacity  to 
absorb  or  retain  the  moisture,  but  send  it  down  in  precipitate  floods  to  the  canyons 
below.  The  large  appropriations  made  upon  this  stream  were  intended  to  be  followed 
by  the  construction  of  storage  works  to  impound  these  flood  waters,  but  these  under- 
takings have  not  been  realized,  except  to  a  very  limited  extent. 

Filing*  on  Balls  Canyon,  1877-1899. 


Claims. 

Claims. 

Miner's 
inchet>. 

Miner's 
inches. 

5,000 

10,000 

144 

10,000 

400 

50 

400 

1,500 

40 

50,000 

5,000 

100 

Claims. 

Claims. 

('bums. 

Claims. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Mincr'a 
inches. 

Mhtcr'x 
Inchtt. 

Miner'  t 

inches. 

200,000 

20,000 

10 

10 

100,000 

10,000 

10 

10 

15,000 

20,000 

10 

10 

1,000 
10 
15,000 

50,000 
50,000 
1,800 

10 
10 
10 

10 

505,  544 

There  are  several  indefinite  claims  which  can  not  be  tabulated  and  a  few  conflicting 
ones  which  aim  at  the  appropriation  of  all  the,  water  in  the  stream. 

CLAIMS   TO    LONG   VALLEY   CREEK.  . 

Long  Valley  Creek  enters  the  Honey  Lake  Basin  from  the  southeast,  and  is  fed 
by  numerous  springs  and  small  tributaries.  Like  all  the  streams  of  this  region,  it  is 
torrential  in  character,  and  would  yield  a  very  large  amount  of  water  with  proper 
storage  facilities.  There  have  been  some  ambitious  attempts  in  this  direction,  of 
which  at  least  one  was  far  advanced  when  overtaken  by  a  disastrous  flood.  The  large 
claims  which  appear  in  the  following  table  were  made  in  connection  with  these  storage 
projects. 

Filings  hi  Long  Valley,  1873-1900. 


Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Miner's 

indies. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Miner's 
indies. 

50 

370 

50,000 

100,000 

250 

40 

20 

150 

100,000 

300 

500 

500 

6,000 

400 

100,000 

200 

2,000 

100 

100 

2,000,000 

500 

1,000 

500 

500 

100 
500 
100 
1,000 

1,000,000 
200,000 
1,000,000 
2,000 

100,000 
2,000 
50,000 
320 

5,000 
200 
25 

75 

1,000 
160 
149 
10,000 

40 

5,  737,  464 

1,050 

2,000,000 

40 

75 

150 

There  are  a  number  of  indefinite  claims  and  several  which  claim  every  drop 
of  water  in  the  stream,  but  comparatively  little  water  is  actually  utilized  here  at 
present. 


IRRIGATION    1'ROHLKMS    OF    HONEY    LAKK    BASIN. 


87 


mi  /,'(/.,•/. -<•  Cm- 1;,   1S7S    IW.i 


Claim*. 

Cljiilns. 

Mia,  r'« 
i  Ill-Ill  *. 

Mini  /''N 
//"7c  ... 

200 
10,080 
100 

300 

1  1  ,  mill 

1,000 

There  were  (wo  indefinite  appropriations,  one  churning  "all  the  water  in  the 
creek,"  and  the  other  "one-quarter  of  :ill  the  water  in  the  creek." 

TIIK    LAKK    DISTRICT. 

Under  this  head  appropriations  of  small  springs  and  streams  having  their  sources 
a  abort  distance  from  Honey  Lake  are  classified. 

Filniii-i  nn  utivunu  and  mnnll  X/H-IHI/X  ,imr  Honey  Lake,  1872-1900. 


Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Claims. 

Winer's 

Mini  r'f 

Miner's 

Miner's 

Miner's 

i  iii-lii  *. 

iiii-lii  «. 

inches. 

i  Hi-Inn. 

50 

40 

200,000 

30,000 

10.000 

2,000 

50 

20,000 

10,000 

200 

100 

100 

250 

100,000 

160 

100 

100 

100 

50,000 

821,  350 

50 

5,000 

50,000 

1,000 

100 

100,000 

100,000 

500 

200 

50,000 

20,000 

200 

60 

50,000 

20,000 

1,000 

There  are  many  indefinite  claims  which  can  not  be  tabulated.  For  the  most 
part  they  refer  to  springs  and  small  streams,  only  suited  to  the  individual  supply  of 
a  single  farm.  An  interesting  feature  in  this  district  is  the  list  of  large  claims  on 
Skedaddle  Creek.  There  are  eleven  of  these,  and  not  one  of  them  was  carried  out 
to  the  point  of  effective  use.  There  were  also  two  large  claims  to  water  from  Honey 
Lake  itself,  neither  of  which  came  to  any  result. 

CLAIMS   TO   WATERS   OF   EAGLE    LAKE. 

The  number  of  claims  tiled  upon  this  great  body  of  water  is  exceedingly  modest, 
but  the  same  remark  does  not  apply  to  the  amount  claimed.  The  favorite  project  in 
this  connection  is  that  of  tapping  the  lake  by  a  tunnel  about  1  mile  in  length, 
although  there  have  been  one  or  two  attempts  to  solve  the  problem  by  pumping. 
The  list  of  claims,  covering  a  period  of  twenty -three  years  (1874-1897),  is  as  follows: 

Lnh\  1S74-1S97. 


Claims. 

Claims. 

Miner'*  im-lu  *. 

Mini  :  V  //.*'//'  >'. 

3,000,000 

400 

3,000,000    :                  1,000 

4,000,000                  100,000 

4,000,0011 

14.201,400 

100,000 

88  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

RECAPITULATION    AND    REVIEW.' 

It  is  interesting  to  bring  together  the  entire  list  of  claims  made  upon  all  the 
waters  entering  into  Honey  Lake  Basin  from  1872,  the  date  of  the  first  record  which 
appears  on  the  books  of  the  county,  down  to  the  spring  of  1900.  We  shall  then 
have  completed  our  survey  of  the  law  of  appropriation  at  work  and  be  ready  to 
consider  its  financial,  social,  and  legal  results. 


Recapitulation  of  claims  in  Honey  Ltik* 

Miner's  i 

Susan  River  district  .....................................................  955,  039 

Willow  Creek  district  ....................................................  6,338,5:;:, 

Balls  Canyon  district  ......................  ...............................  565,  544 

Long  Valley  district  ..........................................  ...........  5,  737,  464 

Baxter  Creek  district  .....  ................................................  11,  600 

Honey  Lake  district  .....................................................  821,  350 

Eagle  Lake  district  .......................................................  14,201,400 


Total .' 28,630,932 

Here  are  total  claims,  under  the  rules  prescribed  by  the  California  law,  of  the 
bewildering  amount  of  28,630,932  miner's  inches.  In  southern  California,  where 
the  rainfall  is  materially  less  than  in  Honey  Lake  Valley,  the  amount  of  water 
represented  by  1  miner's  inch  of  continuous  flow,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure, 
is  considered  sufficient  to  irrigate  4  acres  of  alfalfa,  or  6  acres  of  citrus  trees,  or 
from  8  to  15  acres  of  deciduous  trees.  Making  a  fair  allowance  for  the  difference  in 
rainfall  and  climate  and  the  consequently  shorter  season  in  Honey  Lake  Valley,  we 
may  take  1  inch  to  8  acres  as  the  reasonable  duty  of  water  for  diversified  crops  in 
the  latter  locality.  Upon  this  basis  the  amount  of  water  claimed  in  Honey  Lake 
Basin,  in  accordance  with  the  California  law,  would  irrigate  an  area  of  22'.),u47.4.">i; 
acres,  which  is  considerably  more  than  double  the  irrigable  land  of  our  entire  arid 
region,  according  to  conservative  estimates,  and  represents  a  larger  area  than  that 
occupied  by  most  nations  in  Europe.  Of  course,  it  is  not  pretended  that  those  who 
made  these  excessive  claims  so  far  deceived  themselves  as  to  imagine  that  the  vast 
quantity  of  water  to  which  they  laid  legal  claim  existed  in  Honey  Lake  Basin,  or 
that  they  were  bent  upon  the  impossible  task  of  irrigating  the  entire  United  States 
from  this  point.  But  the  fact  remains  that  these  claims  were  actually  made,  in 
accordance  with  the  law  prescribed  by  the  statutes  of  the  State,  and  this  fact  has  a 
significance  which  should  not  be  lost  sight  of  when  we  come  to  consider  what 
measures  of  reform  and  constructive  legislation  will  best  promote  and  protect  the 
irrigation  industry. 

The  luminous  fact  which  appears  strikingly  on  the  face  of  these  statistics  is  that 
nobody  knew  how  much  water  was  available  for  appropriation,  how  much  they 
needed,  or,  in  case  of  those  who  followed  up  their  claims  with  actual  diversion  and 
use,  how  much  they  received.  The  foundation  of  any  system  of  water  rights  is  the 
appropriation.  If  the  method  employed  in  getting  this  is  faulty,  the  inevitable  result 
is  public  or  private  disaster,  and  it  is  likely  to  be  both.  It  is  clear  from  the  foregoing 
figures  that  the  experience  of  Honey  Lake  Valley  shows  that  the  California  method 
of  appropriation  is  utterly  reckless  and  fraught  with  the  gravest  perils  to  industry 
and  society.  The  evils  to  result  from  such  methods  might  be  expected  to  make 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  89 

themselves  felt  when  the  country  is  well  settled,  :iml  it  becomes  necessary  to  enforce 
the  utmost  economy  in  the  use  of  the  water  supply.  But  we  shall  see  that  with 
probably  no  more  than  20,000  acres  under  cultivation  by  means  of  irrigation  these 
evils  have  already  been  sharply  manifested,  and  that  the,  troubles  created  and  fostered 
by  a  system  of  bad  laws  have  found  no  adequate  cure  in  the  courts. 

THE  DUTY  OF  WATER. 

Among  the  important  subjects  to  be  dealt  with  in  this  report,  according  to  the 
suggestions  of  the  irrigation  expert  in  charge,  was  that  of  the  duty  of  water.  Under 
any  intelligent  and  permanent  system  of  irrigation  it  is  as  necessary  to  fix  upon  some 
unit  of  water  required  for  an  acre  of  land  as  it  is  necessary  in  finance  or  industry  to 
have  a  unit  of  value  or  of  measurement.  Men  can  not  conduct  exchange  without 
dollars  and  cents  to  serve  as  units  of  value.  They  can  not  engage  in  manufacture  or 
trade  and  ignore  long  measure  and  avoirdupois.  There  must  be  some  basis  of  values, 
of  weights,  and  of  measures  before  men  can  deal  intelligently  and  justly  with  each 
other  in  their  daily  transactions.  In  like  manner  it  is  necessary  to  fix  upon  some 
unit  of  water  which  shall  represent  the  reasonable  duty  of  that  element  in  agriculture. 
This  dutv  may  be  reckoned  in  miners  inches  or  acre-feet,  as  may  seem  most  feasible, 
but  it  must  be  fixed  in  some  terms,  then  recognized,  accepted,  and  enforced.  Other- 
wise the  whole  right  of  appropriation  rests  on  shifting  sands. 

The  importance  of  the  duty  of  water  is  recognized  in  most  localities  where 
irrigation  is  practiced.  Honey  Lake  Valley  is,  however,  a  remarkable  exception  to 
this  rule.  Here  there  is  no  common  agreement  as  to  the  amount  of  water  required 
to  irrigate  an  acre  of  land.  If  one  were  to  interview  all  the  irrigators  in  the  valley 
he  would  probably  receive  a  different  estimate  from  each  person.  Their  opinions 
would  vary  in  accordance  with  the  peculiarities  of  the  soil,  differences  of  crop,  and 
even  with  the  temperamental  differences  of  individuals.  Take,  for  example,  two 
riparian  proprietors  living  side  by  side.  One  of  them  will  tell  you  that  if  you  will 
guarantee  to  keep  the  stream  in  its  original  channel  he  will  ask  nothing  more, 
preferring  to  depend  entirely  on  natural  seepage.  His  nearest  neighbor  will  demand 
that  the  entire  stream  be  diverted  and  spread  over  his  farm,  and  will  intimate  that  if 
anything  less  than  this  be  done  he  will  spend  his  last  dollar  in  litigation.  The  same 
contrast  in  opinion  is  found  when  you  talk  with  the  occupants  of  bench  lands  away 
from  the  stream,  where  the  riparian  element  is  entirely  absent.  One  man  wants  all 
the  -water  he  can  get,  while  his  neighbor  with  similar  soil  and  crops  maintains  that 
he  gets  better  results  with  only  half  as  much  irrigation.  When  men  differ  about 
other  subjects  they  leave  the  decision  with  the  statutes  or  the  administration.  But 
in  the  matter  of  water  each  man  is  a  law  unto  himself  and  resents  interference  or 
advice  as  he  would  if  the  same  were  offered  with  regard  to  the  training  of  his 
children. 

Neither  law  nor  custom  has  fixed  the  duty  of  water  in  Honey  Lake  Valley 
Testimony  touching  this  subject  is  sometimes  offered  in  the  courts,  but  there  is  no 
basis  upon  which  just  and  consistent  decisions  may  be  rendered.  The  contracts  of 
local  irrigation  companies  make  no  reference  to  miners'  inches  or  acre-feet.  They 
merely  agree  to  furnish  water  "  sufficient  to  irrigate"  a  given  number  of  acres. 
They  promise  that  these  acres  shall  be  supplied  with  an  "annual  irrigation."  They 


90  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

do  not  state  whether  this  means  water  for  one  crop  of  alfalfa  or  for  three.  These 
vague  arrangements  are  not  supplemented  by  measurement  of  the  heads  of  water 
turned  into  consumers'  ditches.  Everything  is  left  to  the  superintendent  and  ditch 
riders,  who  try  to  apportion  fairly  the  water  that  may  be  in  the  canals  and  reservoirs. 
These  superintendents  do  remarkably  well  under  the  circumstances.  There  can  be 
no  justice  in  water  distribution  under  such  a  plan.  Indeed,  injustice  is  the  only 
possible  result.  The  man  who  makes  loudest  complaint  receives  most  water,  while 
the  one  who  is  most  patient  and  considerate  is  the  certain  sufferer  whenever  the 
supply  is  short.  The  trouble  is  due  to  the  absence  of  any  common  agreement  upon 
the  reasonable  duty  of  water.  In  other  parts  of  the  arid  region  there  is  such  common 
agreement,  established  by  custom  and  enforced  by  law. 

THE    DISTRIBUTION    OF    WATER. 

The  California  statutes  make  no  provision  for  the  distribution  of  water  among 
rival  ditches  or  different  consumers  from  the  same  ditch.  Aside  from  the  brief 
paragraph  on  priority — "first  in  time,  first  in  right" — there  is  nothing  which  beais 
even  remotely  upon  the  matter.  Everything  is  left  for  the  irrigators  to  settle  among 
themselves.  This  results  in  confusion  and  in  bitter  quarrels  among  neighbors.  This 
condition  of  affairs  must  grow  constantly  worse  as  more  land  is  put  into  cultivation, 
ditches  extended,  and  appropriations  increased.  Each  man  manages  his  own  head- 
gate.  His  object  is  to  get  all  the  water  he  possibly  can.  We  have  already  seen 
that  he  has  no  means  of  obtaining  exact  information  in  regard  to  the  status  of 
appropriations  or  the  duty  of  water.  All  he  knows — all  he  can  possibly  know  under 
the  circumstances — is  his  own  necessity.  Even  as  to  this  he  is  liable  to  lie  led  astrav, 
since  nothing  has  been  done  to  give  the  people  of  this  remote  locality  the  benefit  of 
lessons  which  modern  science  has  so  generously  conferred  on  many  other  communities. 
The  sins  of  the  law  are  visited  on  unoffending  neighbors.  Enterprise  is  1  talked, 
and  investment  brought  to  ruin.  One  neighbor  shuts  down  the  headgate  of  another 
and  stands  over  it  with  a  shotgun.  Retaliation  follows  upon  provocation,  and  the  evil 
passions  so  aroused  invent  new  provocation  and  devise  new  methods  of  retaliation. 
A  reservoir  is  built  in  the  mountains  to  store  the  flood  waters  that  they  mav  be 
turned  later  into  the  channel  of  the  stream  and  then  diverted  upon  the  lands  of  those 
who  made  this  prudent  provision  to  supplement  their  share  of  the  perennial  now. 
But  when  the  water  is  turned  down,  old  dams  are  raised  to  intercept  the  increased 
supply  and  the  water  thus  lost  to  those  who  furnished  it.  Costly  works  of  diversion, 
built  without  injunction  and  even  with  the  apparent  approval  of  the  communitv,  a-e 
attacked  and  rendered  useless  by  men  who  act  upon  the  advice  of  their  attornevs. 
It  has  come  to  be  practically  recognized  that  there  is  r.o  law  but  force,  and  that  when 
this  law  has  exhausted  the  resources  of  its  physical  demonstration  by  overt  acts  the 
final  resort  is  to  the  courts.  We  shall  see  how  inconclusive  and  unsatisfactory  a 
method  this  furnishes  of  settling  the  endless  disputes,  and  how,  after  costly  lawsuits 
and  hurtful  agitation,  the  quarrel  travels  back  in  a  circle  until  it  comes  again  to  the 
point  of  physical  violence. 

"Because  the  good  old  rule 

Sufficeth  them,  the  simple  plan, 

That  they  should  take  who  have  the  power 

And  they  should  keep  who  can." 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  91 

The  fault  lies  not  with  the,  people,  not  oven  with  the  lawyers,  though  the  latter 
inevitably  fatten  upon  the  misfortunes  of  the  community.  The  fault  lies  with  the 
irrigation  laws  of  California,  which  are  notable  alike  for  what  they  contain  and  what 
they  omit.  If  deliberately  devised  to  plague  the  people,  no  system  which  man's  evil 
genius  could  invent  would  effect  the  result  more  surely  than  that  system  which 
invites  them  to  make  such  reckless  claims  as  we  have  seen  in  the  case  of  Honey  Lake 
Valley,  and  then  leaves  them  to  light  it  out  to  the  bitter  end. 

LITIGATION. 

The  water  laws  of  California  were  framed  with  only  the  slightest  appreciation 
of  the  ultimate  character  and  importance  of  the  irrigation  industry.  The  source  of 
the  present  statutes  was  the  English  common  law,  and  it  goes  without  saying  that 
this  took  no  account  of  the  peculiar  conditions  of  an  arid  or  semiarid  country.  In 
England  the  doctrine  of  riparian  proprietorship  does  not  interfere  with  the  vast 
majority  of  people  living  away  from  the  streams.  The  climate  is  humid  and  the 
annual  precipitation  usually  abundant.  The  farmer  has  no  use  for  water  beyond 
domestic  needs,  except  to  get  it  off  his  land  as  quickly  as  possible,  and  to  do  this  he 
has  frequently  to  resort  to  drainage.  Streams  are  valuable  for  navigation  and  for 
power,  but  for  neither  of  these  purposes  is  it  often  desirable  to  divert  them  from 
their  natural  channels.  The  same  conditions  exist  in  the  Eastern  States,  which 
adopted  the  English  common  law  as  the  foundation  of  their  jurisprudence. 

In  many  portions  of  California  the  natural  conditions  are  almost  entirely  reversed, 
and  in  such  places  the  limited  rainfall  is  received  almost  entirely  in  the  season  when 
least  needed  for  the  production  of  crops.  Streams  are  not  valuable  for  navigation, 
as  a  rule,  since  the  flow  of  water  is  largely  concentrated  in  the  flood  season,  after 
which  it  dwindles  to  a  slender  volume  or  exposes  dry  channels.  To  assert  the 
riparian  doctrine  under  these  conditions,  and  to  enforce  it  to  its  fullest  extent,  is  to 
make  a  dangerous  monopoly  of  the  water  supply  and  to  condemn  to  perpetual  sterility 
millions  of  fertile  acres  which  might  otherwise  make  homes  for  millions  of  pros- 
perous people.  Had  the  Napoleonic  code,  rather  than  the  English  common  law, 
been  adopted  by  the  early  law  makers  of  California,  very  different  results  would  be 
shown  by  the  irrigation  industry  to-day. 

The  judicial  decisions  which  have  given  irrigation  laws  and  practice  their  present 
character  were  based  more  upon  the  needs  of  mining  than  of  agriculture.  Mining 
was  the  first  great  industry,  and  it  gave  to  all  the  customs  and  institutions  of  Cali- 
fornia a  speculative  color  which  they  might  otherwise  have  escaped.  The  first 
struggle  for  water  arose  in  connection  with  this  industry,  and  the  glitter  of  gold 
blinded  the  eyes  of  lawmakers  and  people  to  the  superior  claims  of  irrigation.  Out 
of  these  conditions  came,  not  unnaturally,  the  assertion  of  property  rights  in  water 
apart  from  the  land  to  which  it  is  applied.  The  following  excerpt  from  a  decision 
by  Chief  Justice  Murray,  in  Hoffman  v.  Stone  (7  Cal.,  46-48),  states  both  the  doctrine 
and  its  history  concisely: 

The  former  decisions  of  this  court  in  cases  involving  the  right  of  parties  to  appropriate  waters  for 
mining  and  other  purposes  have  been  based  upon  the  wants  of  the  community  and  the  peculiar 
condition  of  things  in  this  State  (for  which  there  is  no  precedent)  rather  than  any  absolute  rule  of  law 
governing  such  cases.  The  absence  of  legislation  on  this  subject  has  devolved  on  the  courts  the 


y'2  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

necessity  of  framing  rules  for  the  protection  of  this  great  interest,  and  in  determining  these  questions 
we  have  conformed,  as  nearly  as  possible,  to  the  analogies  of  the  common  law.  The  fact  early  mani- 
fested itself  that  the  mines  could  not  he  successfully  worked  without  a  proprietorship  in  waters,  and  it 
was  recognized  and  maintained.  To  protect  those  who  by  their  energy,  industry,  and  capital  had 
constructed  canals  and  races  carrying  water  for  miles  into  parts  of  the  country  which  must  have  other- 
wise remained  unfruitful  and  undeveloped,  it  was  held  that  the  first  appropriator  acquired  a  special 
property  in  the  waters  thus  appropriated,  and  as  a  necessary  consequence  of  such  property  might 
invoke  all  remedies  for  its  enjoyment  or  defense. 

At  a  later  point  in  this  report  we  shall  see  how  this  theory  of  private  property 
in  water,  regardless  of  the  manner  and  place  of  its  use,  differs  from  the  theory  of 
water  control  which  obtains  in  other  States  and  other  countries,  and  how  it  also 
differs  from  the  theory  on  which  the  most  recent  and  sweeping  decision  of  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  on  this  subject  is  based;  but  in  this  place  we  are  considering 
only  the  California  practice  as  it  now  stands  and  the  consequences  of  that  practice  as 
observed  in  one  part  of  the  State. 

A  few  other  decisions  may  well  be  quoted  to  show  how  consistently  the  view  of 
Chief  Justice  Murray  has  been  adhered  to: 

Right  to  water  acquired  hy  appropriation  may  lie  transferred  like  other  property.  (McDonald 
v.  Bear  River  Co.,  13  Cal.,  220.) 

If  the  original  appropriation  was  for  a  sawmill,  the  water  may  be  used  for  a  gristmill  subsequently 
erected.  (McDonald  c.  Bear  River  Co.,  13  Cal.,  220.) 

If  the  water  was  appropriated  for  a  mining  claim,  which  is  worked  out  and  abandoned,  the  owner 
may  extend  his  ditch  and  use  the  same  quantity  of  water  at  other  points  or  for  a  different  purpose 
(Davis  v.  Gate,  32  Cal.,  26.) 

A  person  entitled  to  divert  a  given  quantity  of  water  from  a  stream  may  take  it  at  any  point  on 
the  stream,  and  may  change  the  point  of  diversion  at  pleasure;  if  the  rights  of  others  be  not  affected 
injuriously.  (Butte  T.  M.  Co.  v.  Morgan,  19  Cal.,  (50! >.  ) 

The  right  of  private  ownership  in  water  is  therefore  clearly  established.  This 
right  entitles  the  owner  to  change  the  point  of  diversion  or  the  place  or  manner  of 
use  at  will,  so  long  as  it  injures  no  one  else.  He  may  also  sell  his  water  like  an}'  other 
commodity.  The  following  decision  furnishes  important  light  upon  the  question  of 
measurement  of  appropriations: 

The  prior  appropriator  is  entitled  to  the  water,  so  undiminished  in  quantity  as  to  leave  sufficient 
to  fill  his.  ditch  as  it  existed  at  the  time  the  locations  were  made  above.  (Bear  River  Co.  r.  New  York 
Mining  Co.,  8  Cal.,  327.) 

It  is  necessary  to  understand  the  law  and  its  accepted  interpretation  in  order  to 
comprehend  the  causes  and  results  of  water  litigation  in  the  basin  which  we  are 
considering. 

THE  SUSAN  RIVER  COMMUNITIES. 

While  no  stream  entering  the  basin  has  been  free  from  litigation,  the  struggle 
for  the  waters  of  Susan  River  (PI.  VII)  has  naturally  been  most  prolific  of  lawsuits. 
In  order  to  understand  some  of  the  chief  elements  entering  into  these  troubles  it  is 
necessary  to  know  the  location  of  three  different  communities  which  have  grown  up 
with  the  aid  of  these  waters. 

While  Susanville  is  the  chief  town  and  county  seat,  it  is  not  an  agricultural  com- 
munity, and  its  people  have  therefore  been  comparatively  free  from  lawsuits  of  this 
kind.  The  tirst  important  agricultural  community  on  the  stream  lies  about  5  miles 


U.  S.  Dept.  cf  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations. 


Plate  VII. 


IKKIGATION     1'ROHLKMS    ny    HONKY     I,AKK    HASIN.  93 

oast  of  the  county  scat.  This  is  .lohnstonvillo.  more  commonly  known  hv  the 
euphonious  name  of  "Toadtmvn."  Ifcrc  u  Dumber  of  carlv  settlors  made  their 
homes,  planting  tields  and  orchards,  and  becoming  thoroughly  prosperous  through 
years  of  patient  industry.  Practically  all  are  riparian  proprietors,  and  much  of  their 
land  is  irrigated  by  natural  overflow  and  seepage.  Although  tho  volume  of  tho 
stream  varies  considerably  from  year  to  year,  in  accordance  with  the  snowfall  in  the 
mountains,  there  is  seldom  any  serious  shortage  at  this  point,  except  for  late  irriga- 
tion. Here  is  a  group  of  farmers  whoso  in  to  rests  in  the  water  supply  are  common 
and  who  therefore  stand  together  when  any  controversy  arises.  Although  each  has 
his  separate  system  of  distributaries,  they  nevertheless  work  in  cooperation  in  main- 
taining common  dams  and  hoadgates  and  regulating  tho  supply  during  the  season. 

Immediately  adjacent  to  Johnstonville  and  extending  4  or  5  miles  east  is  the 
neighborhood  known  as  Buggytown.1  This  includes  but  a  small  group  of  settlors, 
whose  chief  canal  is  known  as  the  Batchelder  &  Adams,  taking  water  from  the  river 
at  a  point  whore  it  sometimes,  though  rarely,  interferes  to  a  slight  extent  with  the 
Johnstonville  farmers.  The  situation  of  the  Buggytown  people  is  such  that  they 
must  divert  most  of  their  supply  from  the  stream  and  lead  it  upon  their  lands  through 
canals,  since  they  are  able  to  irrigate  only  a  portion  of  their  lower  lands  from  the 
natural  overflow. 

In  the  delta  of  Susan  River,  bordering  the  western  and  northwestern  sides  of 
Honey  Lake,  is  the  large  Tule  district,  which  has  been  rather  conspicuously 
identified  with  the  more  important  litigation  in  the  valley.  The  dependence  for 
irrigation  in  this  locality  is  practically  all  upon  the  overflow,  which  is  spread  out 
upon  the  land  by  a  system  of  crude  dams  and  levees,  and  made  useful  in  the 
production  of  wild  hay.  The  total  tonnage  of  this  product  is  large,  and  therefore 
very  important  to  the  farmer  of  the  neighborhood,  but  the  yield  per  acre  is  slight 
compared  with  that  of  the  alfalfa  fields  —  probably  not  more  than  1  ton  of  wild  hay 
per  acre  upon  the  average.  Through  the  elaborate  network  of  sloughs  and  natural 
canals,  in  tho  midst  of  which  tho  Tule  homes  and  farms  have  been  developed, 
considerably  more  than  three-quarters  of  the  vast  quantity  of  water  which  goes  to 
the  making  of  Honey  Lake  finds  its  way  to  that  sink  in  the  heart  of  the  basin. 
During  the  winter  and  spring  large  portions  of  the  Tule  district  arc  under  water  and 
look  like  a  part  of  the  lake  itself.  Under  these  circumstances  the  farmers  have  no 
need  of  diverting  and  applying  the  water  by  the  common  irrigation  methods. 
Nature  has  done  the  work  for  them  —  in  a  most  slovenly  and  wasteful  way,  it  is 
true  —  and  the}'  have  but  to  throw  up  slight  levees,  with  small  dams  in  the  depres- 
sions, in  order  to  hold  the  water  back  until  the  soil  is  well  saturated.  In  this 
manner  thev  have  had  the  benefit  of  all  the  flood  waters  which  have  made  Honey 
Lake  a  body  covering  64,000  acres  of  surface.  It  was  inevitable  that  when,  in  the 
natural  course  of  events,  these  flood  waters  should  be  needed  for  diversion  upon  tho 
large  areas  of  fertile  sagebrush  lands  lying  above  the  stream,  the  Tule  district  would 
be  seriously  affected.  Either  they  must  adapt  their  methods  to  changed  conditions. 
applying  the  water  supply  more  economically  and  scientifically,  perhaps  abandoning 
the  wild-hay  crop  to  a  considerable  extent  and  engaging  in  the  production  of  alfalfa 


of  the  early  settlers  posse  wed  a  buggy  at  a  time  when  such  luxuries  were  somewhat  rare; 
hence  the  name  which  has  been  accepted  for  the  neighborhood. 


94  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

and  diversified  crops,  or  thousands  and  thousands  of  acres  of  fertile  soil  must 
remain  forever  useless  and  desolate.  There  was  no  other  alternative.  It  was  a  hard 
situation  for  the  Tulc  fanners;  an  equally  hard  one  for  the  later  settlers  who  were 
suffering1  for  the  water  necessary  to  make  their  homes,  and  for  those  who  had 
developed  large  private  enterprises  for  the  purpose  of  reclaiming  the  sagebrush 
lands.  As  the  Tule  farmers  are  riparian  proprietors,  with  vested  interests  long 
established  by  actual  use,  they  feel  that  any  diversions  which  may  diminish  the 
quantity  of  flood  water  must  be  injurious  to  them.  Out  of  these  conditions  costly 
litigation  and  much  ill  feeling  among  neighbors  have  come  in  the  past. 

The  three  communities  sketched  in  the  foregoing  include  practically  all  the 
old  settlers  of  the  valley  taking  water  directly  from  Susan  River.  During  the  past 
ten -years  another  community  has  been  growing  up  on  the  higher  sagebrush  lands 
watered  by  Lake  Leavitt  and  the  system  to  which  it  belongs.  This  is  somewhat 
widely  scattered,  but  is  united  by  a  common  interest  in  the  waters  that  may  be  saved 
from  waste  by  storing  the  floods  and  enforcing  a  more  economical  use  of  the  peren- 
nial flow  in  periods  of  plenty.  These  new  farmers  produce  three  annual  crops  of 
alfalfa,  with  a  yield  ranging  from  3  to  6  tons  per  acre,  against  1  ton  per  acre  of  wild 
hav  from  the  river  bottom  and  tule  fields.  It  is  here  that  small,  diversified  farms 
and  well-kept  orchards  may  be  expected  to  develop  in  the  future,  since  these  results 
arc  always  associated  with  the  more  economical  and  skillful  use  of  water.  The  rise 
of  what  was  originally  known  as  the  Leavitt  system,  and  is  now  the  property  of  the 
Colonial  Irrigation  Company  of  Honey  Lake  Valley,  has  intensified  the  struggle  for 
water  and  precipitated  several  lawsuits  which  seem  to  involve  the  development  of 
the  country  to  a  marked  degree.  Old  settlers  have  opposed  this  system  only  to  the 
extent  that  they  feared  it  might  encroach  upon  their  established  rights  and  deprive 
them  of  w.ater  which  they  had  formerly  used  and  still  used  for  the  production  of 
their  crops.  They  concede  that  there  are  flood  waters  now  wasted  which  might  be 
stored  to  the  advantage  of  the  whole  community,  but  under  prevailing  laws  it  is 
extremely  difficult  to  carry  on  a  system  dependent  upon  the  use  of  flood  waters — 
partly  by  diversion  and  partly  by  storage — in  the  midst  of  riparian  owners  and  old 
appropriately  who  have  no  conception  of  the  actual  water  suppty,  of  the  duty  of 
water,  nor  the  methods  of  distribution  employed  in  countries  having  more  enlightened 
laws.  Again,  it  should  be  said  that  the  trouble  lies  not  with  the  people  themselves, 
but  with  the  system  which  compels  them  to  settle  by  physical  force  and  wasteful 
litigation  the  controversies  which  should  have  been  settled  in  the  beginning  by 
a  proper  method  of  appropriation,  and  the  results  of  which  should  be  enforced  by  a 
system  of  administration  commanding  everybody's  respect. 

CAUSE  AND  CHARACTER  OF  LAWSUITS. 

It  might  be  expected  that  in  the  early  days  of  the  country's  settlement  there  would 
be  water  enough  for  all,  and  therefore  no  occasion  for  litigation.  The  first  judgment, 
however,  bears  date  of  June  7,  1864,  and  related  to  the  waters  of  Lassen  Creek.  The 
plaintiffs  were  awarded  75  miner's  inches  and  the  defendants  enjoined  against  inter- 
fering therewith.  The  case  has  no  special  interest  for  the  present  inquiry  except  as 
marking  the  beginning  of  the  water  controversies  of  the  valley.  The  total  number 
of  judgments  in  the  period  of  thirty -six  years,  from  1864  to  1900,  was  fifty-three.  Of 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  95 

those  thirty-live  related  to  Susan  River,  seven  to  Willow  Creek,  three  to  Balls 
Canyon,  three  to  Long  Valley,  two  to  Baxter  Creek,  and  four  to  the  lake  district. 
Everv  one  of  these  suits  may  lie  traced  to  the  laxness  of  the  appropriation  law  and 
the  absence  of  the  exercise  of  public  authority  over  the  distribution  of  water.  While 
the  tinancial  loss  occasioned  by  this  litigation,  direct  and  indirect,  may  only  be 
guessed  at,  it  is  perfect  I  v  safe  to  say  that  if  the  same  amount  of  11101103'  had  been 
used  in  storing  flood  waters  it  would  have  furnished  a  satisfactory  supply  to  all 
parties  engaged  in  the  lawsuits  and  irrigated  much  more  land  than  is  now  in  cultiva- 
tion. These  suits  were  of  three  classes,  as  follows:  First,  those  which  arose  from 
conflicts  between  appropriators  as  to  the  amount  of  water  each  was  entitled  to  use; 
second,  those  which  came  from  misunderstanding  as  to  the  precise  meaning  of  judg- 
ments previously  rendered;  third,  those  which  were  due  to  the  vague  and  indefinite 
terms  of  contracts  between  irrigation  companies  and  consumers.  In  order  to  show 
more  clearly  the  evils  arising  from  present  laws  and  the  prevailing  theories  of  water 
ownership  and  control,  it  is  proposed  to  analyze  three  typical  cases  representing 
these  different  aspects  of  the  matter. 


What  is  locally  known  as  "the  big  water  suit"  began  with  the  filing  of  com- 
plaints on  July  12,  1890,  and  ended  with  stipulated  judgments  in  January  and  Feb- 
ruary, 1893.  Although  there  were  thirty-four  of  these  judgments,  involving  more 
than  sixty  litigants,  they  all  related  to  the  title  to  the  waters  of  Susan  Itivor  and  its 
tributaries  (including  Willow  Creek)  as  between  the  residents  on  these  streams  and 
the  farmers  of  the  Tulo  district  on  the  shores  of  Honey  Lake. 

This  suit  marked  the  beginning  of  the  inevitable  struggle  between  those  who 
desired  to  have  the  waste  waters  flow  "as  they  had  been  wont  to  flow  from  time 
immemorial"  and  those  who  desired  to  store  and  divert  these  waters  so  that  the  arid 
lands  might  be  reclaimed.  In  a  word,  it  was  the  irrepressible  conflict  between  natural 
irrigation  and  artificial  irrigation.  The  adoption  of  the  former  method  would  limit, 
the  amount  of  land  that  may  be  cultivated  in  the  future  to  that  which  can  be  sufficiently 
moistened  by  the  spreading  of  the  waters  in  times  of  flood  and  by  the  seepage  from 
streams  in  times  of  perennial  flow.  It  is  true  that  by  veiy  crude  devices  and  some 
slight  labor  water  is  held  upon  the  fields  a  little  longer  than  it  would  otherwise 
remain.  Practically,  however,  natural  irrigation  means  simply  that  man  shall  rest 
satisfied  with  what  nature  has  done,  and  that  agriculture  shall  be  limited  to  the  moist 
lands  in  river  bottoms  and  around  the  margins  of  ponds  and  lakes.  Artificial  irriga- 
tion, on  the  other  hand,  aims  as  much  to  keep  the  water  off  the  land  when  it  is  not 
needed  as  to  bring  it  on  the  land  when  it  is  needed.  The  utility  of  artificial  irrigation 
in  a  given  locality  is  not  limited  at  all  to  the  area  natu'rally  Hooded,  but  only  by  the 
actual  amount  of  water  which  the  stream  may  contain.  Each  miner's  inch  of  this 
water  is  equal  to  the  reclamation  of  a  certain  number  of  acres.  It  is  the  office  of 
artificial  irrigation  to  see  that  the  maximum  amount  of  land  is  irrigated  with  the 
minimum  amount  of  water.  The  moment  that  artificial  irrigation  begins  to  assert 
itself  trouble  arises  with  those  who  depend  on  natural  irrigation  and  claim  the  entire 
volume  of  the  stream  for  those  wasteful  uses  which  have  furnished  sustenance  to  their 
crops  of  native  hay  and  water  grasses.  In  the  end  one  system  or  the  other  must 


96  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

prevail.  Either  the  water  must  be  used  for  the  greatest  good  of  the  greatest  number 
or  the  country  must  be  abandoned  to  a  few  amphibious  farmers  living  in  the  midst 
of  cattle  and  wild  beasts.  Those  who  claim  the  protection  of  the  law  in  the  continued 
enjoyment  of  natural  irrigation  are  no  more  selfish  than  other  men.  They  stand 
upon  their  rights  as  they  understand  them  and  are  perfectly  sincere  when  they 
contend  that  any  interference  with  the  natural  flow  of  the  stream  results  in  loss  and 
consequent  injustice  to  them.  They  claim  that  all  the  water  they  have  had  in  the 
past  is  actually  needed  to  properly  irrigate  their  land.  It  is  perhaps  true  that  the 
water  is  needed  for  the  kind  of  irrigation  they  have  practiced.  But  this  in  nowise 
alters  the  fact  that  the  issue  raised  by  these  conditions  involves  the  whole  future  of 
the  country  under  consideration.  The  country  in  Hone}'  Lake  Basin  will  be  sparsely 
or  densely  peopled,  will  produce  little  or  vast  wealth  in  aggregate,  will  linger  upon 
the  edge  of  semibarbarism  or  move  forward  to  the  enjoyment  of  a  high  state  of 
civilization,  according  as  this  question  is  answered  in  one  way  or  the  other. 

These  issues  were  raised  for  the  first  time  in  "the  big  water  suit."  The  time 
was  favorable  for  the  storage  side  of  the  question,  since  it  fell  in  a  period  of  wet 
years  when  the  Tule  district  was  really  suffering  from  an  excess  rather  than  a  dearth 
of  water,  even  when  judged  from  the  standpoint  of  natural  irrigation.  The  advocates 
of  storage  argued  that  the  carrying  out  of  their  plans  would  do  the  Tule  farmers  more 
good  than  harm  by  reducing  the  winter  and  spring  overflow,  when  the  excess  of 
water  really  amounted  to  a  nuisance,  and  by  keeping  up  the  flow  of  the  stream  later 
in  the  irrigation  season  as  the  result  of  seepage  from  the  higher  lands.  In  behalf  of 
the  more  economical  and  skillful  use  of  water,  it  wa^i  urged  that  the  Tule  farmers 
would  be  still  further  benefited  if  they  restricted  the  product  of  wild  hay  as  much  as 
possible  and  raised  alfalfa  upon  their  better  lands.  The  difference  between  one  lean 
crop  of  poor  native  grass  and  three  good  crops  of  alfalfa  would  add  enormously  to 
the  wealth  of  the  Tule  district,  it  was  argued.  To  illustrate,  one  Tule  farmer  has  an 
estate  of  3,000  acres.  Half  of  this  estate  is  in  sagebrush  and  of  no  value  except  for 
inferior  pasture.  The  other  half  is  watered  by  the  overflow  and  produces  about 
2,000  tons  of  wild  hay  worth,  say,  $8,000.  With  water  properly  stored  and  distributed 
his  sagebrush  lands  would  produce  4  tons  per  acre  of  alfalfa,  or  a  total  of  6,000  tons, 
worth  $30,000.  Capitalize  this  at  10  per  cent  (which  money  is  worth  in  this  locality) 
and  it  would  increase  the  valuation  of  the  estate  at  least  fivefold.  From  this  illus- 
tration, which  represents  average  conditions  in  the  Tule  district,  it  clearly  appears 
that  the  Tule  farmers  are  themselves  large  sufferers  in  consequence  of  the  vicious 
system  of  natural  irrigation,  though  the  entire  community  shares  in  the  great  loss, 
just  as  it  would  share  in  the  benefits  which  might  accrue  from  the  more  enlightened 
forms  of  irrigation  practice. 

Before  considering  the  effects  upon  storage  enterprises  of  ''the  big  water  suit," 
it  will  be  interesting  to  examine  some  of  the  minor  judgments  in  that  case. 

SOME    BEWILDERING    DECISIONS. 

Indefiniteness  is  the  characteristic  of  the  large  majority  of  decisions  which  have 
resulted  from  water  litigation  in  Honey  Lake  Basin.  Judgments  are  rarely  expressed 
in  quantitative  terms,  and  when  they  are,  the  language  more  frequently  refers  to 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  97 

proportions  of  stream  or  ditch  than  to  a  specific  number  of  miner's  inches.  We 
quote  from  some  of  the  judgments  in  "the  big  water  suit:" 

Defendant  Robert  Johnston,  administrator  of  estate  of  Nicholas  Lute,  deceased,  adjudged  right  to 
use  waters  of  stream  for  irrigation  of  lands  described  in  his  answer,  and  forwatering  stock  and  domestic 
purposes  to  the  extent  that  they  have  been  heretofore  used,  as  set  out  in  his  answer  in  said  cause. 

Defendant  Charles  La \vson  adjudged  right  to  use  of  waters  of  Gold  Run  Creek  in  same  terms  as  in 
Defendant  Johnston's  case.  [Language  identical.] 

Defendant  D.  W.  Ridenour  awarded  waters  of  Gold  Run  in  same  terms  as  two  preceding  defendants. 

Five  defendants  received  judgments  in  identical  terms,  and  it  would  seem  that 
none  of  them  was  in  a  position  to  know  definitely  what  rights  he  had  won  as  the 
price  of  the  lawsuit.  The  end  of  the  case  found  them  precisely  where  they  were  at 
the  beginning. 

Defendant  W.  N.  Cain  adjudged  sufficient  water  to  irrigate  about  18  acres  of  orchard  land  and  for 
stock  and  domestic  uses. 

Even  the  amount  of  land  is  left  indefinite  by  the  use  of  the  word  "about,"  and 
no  definite  quantity  of  water  is  mentioned. 

Eleven  defendants  in  the  Johnstonville  neighborhood  were  disposed  of  as  follows: 

*  *  *  Adjudicating  riparian  rights  to  flow  of  all  waters  of  stream  in  natural  channels  flowing  across 
their  said  lands.  Right  to  use  of  water  on  irrigable  lands  is  shown  on  plat  filed  and  marked  ' '  Exhihit 
A,"  by  appropriation  to  amount  necessary  for  production  of  crops.  Each  defendant  shall  return  surplus 
water  diverted  to  the  stream,  except  such  as  may  be  conducted  to  adjacent  irrigable  lands  to  other 
defendants.  [Two  defendants  excepted  from  requirement  as  to  return  of  water.] 

Here  is  a  group  of  important  farms  the  water  rights  for  which,  aside  from  those 
of  riparian  character,  are  expressed  in  the  vague  phrase,  "amount  necessary  for 
production  of  crops."  Who  is  to  say  what  amount  is  necessary  for  the  purpose? 
Supposing  rival  claimants  assert  that  an  unnecessary  amount  is  being  used,  how  is 
the  matter  to  be  settled  ?  By  more  lawsuits,  of  course.  There  can  be  nothing  final 
or  satisfactory  about  such  an  adjudication  in  a  growing  country. 

Defendant  L.  Woodstock:  Judgment  for  sufficient  water  for  200  acres  [which  is  described]  and 
for  irrigating,  stock,  and  all  domestic  use  thereon. 

The  judgment  goes  on  to  describe  the  size  of  the  flume  in  which  the  water  is  to 
be  taken,  thereby  furnishing  some  hint  as  to  the  extent  of  the  right;  but  even  this 
is  upset  by  the  latter  part  of  the  judgment,  which  says  the  defendant  may  use  "said 
ditch  and  flume  when  same  does  not  interfere  with  rights  of  plaintiffs."  Who  is  to 
say  when  the  plaintiffs'  rights  are  actually  interfered  with  ?  If  the  plaintiffs,  then 
there  is  no  doubt  that  interference  will  begin  at  an  early  date;  if  the  defendants, 
then  we  may  predict  that  there  will  never  be  any  interference.  Nothing  is  settled 
by  such  a  decision.  It  means  another  lawsuit  as  soon  as  dissatisfaction  arises  on 
either  side. 

Defendants  N.  Holmes,  Otto  Ranker,  and  J.  Van  Notten:  Judgment  for  50  inches  of  water  to  be 
diverted  by  defendants  into  their  ditch  at  all  times  when  there  is  water  flowing  from  Susan  River  into 
what  is  known  as  the  Dill  Slough  and  Little  Slough,  for  irrigation,  stock,  and  domestic  purposes  on 
their  several  premises  and  no  other.  In  times  when  there  is  more  water  than  plaintiffs  need,  defendants 
may  divert  and  use  additional  water  as  they  may  require. 

Here  is  another  judgment  of  similar  character,  but  even  more  bewildering: 
Defendant  Charles  Hartson:  Has  right  to  divert  water  of  Big  Slough  for  irrigation  of   [land 
described]  and  for  domestic  and  stock  purposes  to  extent  of  one-fourth  of  waters  flowing  in  said  slough 

23856— No.  100—01 7 


98  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

prior  to  May  10  of  each  year.  From  May  10  to  June  20  said  defendant  shall  have  one-fourth  of  said 
water,  provided  that  said  one-fourth  shall  not  exceed  50  inches.  In  times  of  extreme  drought 
defendant's  one-fourth  shall  not  exceed  25  inches  from  June  20  to  August  1.  In  addition  defendant 
.shall  have  all  waters  turned  into  said  slough  by  plaintiffs  prior  to  August  1.  After  August  1  defend- 
ant shall  have  one-quarter  of  said  waters  so  turned  into  said  slough.  Plaintiffs  have  right  to  divert 
water  for  irrigation,  stock,  and  domestic  use,  and  have  right  to  maintain  dams  and  bulkheads  and 
regulate  flow  of  water  down  Van  Notten,  Dill,  and  Big  sloughs,  and  to  exclude  all  the  waters  of  the 
river  from  said  sloughs  from  and  after  May  10  of  each  year,  and  to  compel  waters  to  flow  down  main 
channel  of  Susan  River  from  June  20  to  August  1.  Plaintiffs  have  right  to  use  sloughs  as  waterways 
for  diverson  of  water  from  their  land.  Defendant  shall  not  in  any  way  interfere  with  exercise  of  such 
rights  by  plaintiffs. 

Would  it  be  possible  to  frame  a  judgment  in  more  indefinite  terms?  How 
could  such  a  judgment  settle  anything  ?  The  interests  of  these  neighbors,  plaintiffs 
and  defendants,  are  diametrically  opposed.  Each  wants  the  stream  to  flow  in  a 
different  direction,  and  the  season's  crop  is  staked  upon  the  result.  Under  such 
circumstances  there  can  not  possibly  be  an  agreement  as  to  what  constitutes  "one- 
fourth"  of  the  water.  The  actual  result  of  this  case  was  a  fierce  quarrel,  on  the 
merits  of  which  the  communit}'  was  divided.  When  the  defendant  lifted  his  headgate, 
the  plaintiffs  shut  it  down.  There  was  shaking  of  fists  and  brandishing  of  shotguns. 
Then  came  the  lawsuit.  The  defendant  won,  but  it  was  immediatel\T  announced  that 
the  plaintiff  would  bring  another  suit.  Neither  the  quarreling  neighbors  nor  the 
court  which  tried  to  adjust  their  grievances  is  to  be  blamed  for  the  unhappy  state 
of  affairs.  The  fault  is  in  the  law  on  which  the  California  irrigation  industry  is 
founded. 

The  judgments  quoted  are  not  exceptional,  but  representative  of  the  entire  list. 
If  we  took  up  each  one  separately  we  should  find  nearly  all  of  them  inconclusive  and 
incapable  of  being  carried  out  to  the  satisfaction  of  both  parties,  taking  human 
nature  as  it  is.  They  are  decisions  which  do  not  decide — which  not  only  invite  more 
lawsuits,  but  practically  compel  them.  In  this  connection  it  should  be  remembered 
that  the  law  provides  no  method  for  the  distribution  of  water  under  public  authority. 
Each  man  is  a  law  unto  himself  until  somebody  takes  him  into  court,  and  he  emerges 
from  that  tribunal  no  wiser  than  when  he  went  in. 

THE    STIPULATION    AS   TO    STORAGE. 

We  come  now  to  the  vexed  question  concerning  the  use  of  the  surplus  waters  of 
Susan  River  as  between  the  storage  enterprise  and  the  farmers  of  the  Tule  district. 
The  stipulated  judgment  in  this  case,  as  condensed  by  those  who  searched  the  record 
for  the  purposes  of  this  report,  reads  as  follows: 

Defendants  B.  H.  Leavitt  and  C.  C.  Hutchison :  Defendants  to  have  right  to  store  and  use  waters 
of  Susan  River  from  March  1  to  July  1,  providing  1,000  inches  of  water  are  permitted  to  flow  in  the 
channel  of  Susan  River  immediately  above  the  mouth  of  Willow  Creek.  During  the  remainder  of  the 
year  defendants  may  use  and  store  all  waters  in  excess  of  250  inches  flowing  at  point  aforesaid.  Pro- 
vides methods  of  measuring  water  in  case  of  dispute  as  to  the  amount  flowing  at  mouth  of  Willow 
Creek.  Fixes  limit  of  evaporation  and  loss  of  waters  stored  in  reservoirs  at  head  of  river,  in  passing 
from  said  reservoirs  to  Lake  Leavitt,  at  10  per  cent. 

It  was  believed  by  the  defendants  in  this  case  that  their  success  in  obtaining  this 
stipulation  marked  the  beginning  of  a  new  era  in  the  irrigation  development  of  Honey 
Lake  Valley.  The  Tule  district  had  yielded  its  right,  in  the  view  of  the  plaintiffs,  to 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  99 

the  entire  waters  of  Susan  River,  except  1,000  inches  from  March  1  to  July  1  and 
2.">o  inches  from  July  1  to  March  1.  As  the  appropriations  above  Willow  Creek  are 
comparatively  insignificant,  and  as  nearly  all  the  water  taken  to  satisfy  them  is  used 
in  such  a  manner  as  quickly  to  find  its  way  back  into  natural  channels,  the  plaintiffs 
thought  they  were  henceforth  secure  in  the  possession  of  nearly  all  the  water  descend- 
ing from  the  large  and  valuable  watershed  of  Susan  River.  This  constituted  the 
foundation  of  a  magnificient  enterprise  which  might  readily  hope  to  reclaim  between 
50,000  and  75,000  acres  of  land  and  create  a  community  several  times  as  large  as  the 
present  population  of  Lasson  County.  The  battle  between  natural  irrigation  and 
artificial  irrigation  seemed  at  that  moment  to  have  been  won  for  the  latter  so  far  as 
the  all-important  water  rights  were  concerned.  The  phrase  "store  and  use"  was 
interpreted  by  the  plaintiffs  to  confer  the  right  of  diversion  equally  with  that  of 
storage,  provided  the  stipulated  minimum  of  1,000  inches  and  250  inches  at  different 
seasons,  respectively,  was  permitted  to  flow  down  to  the  tules.  A  point  of  measure- 
ment was  fixed,  but  no  point  of  diversion  was  either  fixed  or  forbidden,  and  the  law 
gives  large  latitude  on  this  score.  From  the  day  the  judgment  was  recorded  almost 
to  the  present  time  construction  has  gradually  proceeded  under  the  rights  which  the 
plaintiffs  and  their  successors  supposed  this  judgment  had  conferred  upon  them. 
Since  it  was  rendered  the  system  has  twice  changed  hands,  and  on  each  occasion  this 
stipulation  was  regarded  as  the  most  valuable  item  on  the  list  of  assets.  Events  have 
proved,  however,  that  the  most  important  judgment  ever  rendered  in  the  history  of 
Honey  Lake  litigation  is  open  to  attack.  This  is  a  matter  of  grave  consequence  not 
only  because  of  the  large  investments  which  were  predicated  upon  the  judgment,  but 
still  more  on  account  of  the  homes  and  farms  since  created  and  resting  upon  the  same 
foundation. 


In  November,  1897,  the  successors  in  interest  of  the  plaintiffs  in  this  case  began 
the  construction  of  a  substantial  dam  at  a  point  on  Susan  River  200  feet  below  the 
mouth  of  Willow  Slough,  which  now  conducts  nearly  all  the  waters  of  Willow  Creek 
into  the  river.  The  dam  is  considerably  above  the  old  mouth  of  Willow  Creek, 
which  is  now  a  dry  channel  except  in  seasons  of  unusual  flood.  To  complete  the  dam 
and  render  it  effective  it  was  necessary  to  build  extensive  levees  on  the  north  side  of 
the  river  and  to  provide  outlets  into  a  cross  slough  in  order  to  relieve  the  pressure 
on  the  structure.  A  large  outlet  canal  was  constructed  for  a  distance  of  about  4 
miles.  The  work  was  mostly  finished  by  the  spring  of  1898,  the  total  cost  being 
about  $12,000. 

Although  the  proposed  construction  had  been  widely  discussed  throughout  the 
valley,  both  in  the  newspapers  and  in  public  meetings,  the  builders  heard  but  little 
opposition  to  the  project.  Certainly  no  injunction  was  served  upon  them.  As  soon 
as  it  was  attempted  to  put  the  new  works  into  use,  however,  the  farmers  of  the  Tule 
district  protested  that  the  new  dam  interfered  with  their  rights.  They  asked  the 
court  for  an  injunction  restraining  the  use  of  the  dam,  and  brought  suit  to  have  it 
condemned  as  a  nuisance  and  removed.  The  case  was  argued  on  demurrer  and 
decided  in  favor  of  the  defendants. '  Pending  the  filing  of  a  new  complaint  the  Tule 
people  appeared  in  force  and  removed  the  flashboards  from  the  dam,  claiming  to  act 


100  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

upon  the  advice  of  their  attorney.  The  defendants  replaced  the  dashboards,  their 
opponents  took  them  down,  and  the  process  continued  for  some  time,  varied  with 
occasional  threats  of  more  aggressive  action  on  both  sides.  The  result  was  that  the 
dam  was  never  used,  except  for  a  few  hours.  The  case  was  finally  tried  in  July, 
1899,  and  judgment,  as  condensed  for  this  report,  was  rendered  as  follows: 

Declares  dam  near  mouth  of  Willow  Creek  a  nuisance  and  enjoins  its  maintenance  by  defendant, 
as  it  is  now  and  has  heretofore  been  maintained  and  used. 

This  decision  was  so  unsatisfactory  to  both  sides  of  the  controversy  that  both 
appealed  to  the  supreme  court.  The  plaintiffs  wanted  the  dam  removed  and  the 
judgment  ordered  nothing  of  the  kind.  The  defendants  wanted  their  rights  inter- 
preted and  to  be  told  how,  if  the  dam  was  not  built  in  accordance  with  the  stipulation, 
it  could  be  made  to  accord  with  it,  thereby  giving  them  the  benefits  of  the  water  to 
which  they  supposed  they  were  entitled  without  inflicting  injury  upon  their  neighbors 
below.  The  decision  shed  no  light  on  these  questions.  The  dam  was  a  nuisance,  but 
it  could  remain.  It  could  not,  however,  be  maintained  "as  it  is  now  and  has  hereto- 
fore been  maintained  and  used."  As  we  have  already  seen,  it  has  practically  not 
been  used  at  all.  Those  who  built  it  had  thought  that  the  actual  use  of  the  dam 
would  furnish  the  real  test  as  to  its  compliance,  or  failure  to  comply,  with  the  letter 
and  spirit  of  the  stipulation. 

The  case  is  one  of  much  importance  to  the  irrigation  industry  of  Honey  Lake 
Valley.  It  is  also  interesting  because  of  the  light  it  throws  upon  irrigation  law  and 
practice  in  California,  and  the  judicial  decisions  based  thereon.  For  this  reason  it 
seems  worth  while  to  give  the  merits  of  the  controversy,  as  they  appeared  in  the 
testimony  and  otherwise,  from  the  standpoint  both  of  plaintiffs  and  defendants. 

MERITS   AND   LESSONS   OF   THE    CONTROVERSY. 

A  few  months  subsequent  to  the  rendering  of  the  stipulated  judgment  the 
plaintiff's  in  the  case  sold  their  interests  in  the  system  to  Mr.  Edward  T.  Purser. 
He  carried  on  the  work  of  construction  over  a  period  of  four  years,  devoting  his 
expenditure  mostly  to  the  increase  of  reservoir  capacities.  In  1897  he  disposed  of  his 
interest  to  The  Associated  Colonies,  a  New  York  corporation.  After  a  careful  study 
of  conditions  existing  in  the  valley,  the  officers  of  this  company  realized  the  startling 
waste  of  water  resulting  from  the  separate  operation  of  many  different  ditches  and 
the  large  gains  which  might  be  made  by  all  concerned  if  the  water  supply  could  be 
handled  as  a  whole.  To  this  end  they  proposed  to  put  their  own  system  on  the  basis 
of  a  cooperative  company,  so  that  the  ownership  of  the  water  and  land  might  be 
forever  united,  and  to  invite  the  entire  community  to  participate  in  the  undertaking. 
Meetings  were  held  throughout  the  valley  and  committees  appointed  to  represent 
various  interests  and  communities.  The  project  was  cordially  approved  by  many  of 
the  oldest  appropriators,  the  argument  being  that  by  consolidating  all  rights  and 
works  in  one  cooperative  company  it  would  not  only  be  possible  to  administer  the 
existing  supply  much  more  economically  and  harmoniously,  but  that  all  would  be 
benefited  in  addition  by  the  storage  of  waters  which  were  being  wholly  wasted. 
The  scope  of  the  proposed  operations  was  well  evidenced  by  the  makeup  of  the  board 
of  directors  of  the  cooperative  company.  These  represented  the  following  towns 


IRRIGATION    PBOULKMS    OK    HONKY    LAKE    BASIN.  101 

and  neighborhoods:  Susanville,  Jolmstom  ille,  Buggytown,  Standisli,  Milford. 
Amedee,  and  the  Tule  district.  It  was  believed  that  a  board  as  representative  as  this 
would  be,  able  to  protect  the  interests  of  all  localities  and  avoid  social  friction  and 
litigation,  with  resulting  prosperity  for  the  valley's  irrigation  industry  as  a  whole. 
The  subscriptions  for  the  stock  of  the  new  company  were  encouraging  in  amount 
and  character. 

With  every  apparent  sign  of  enthusiasm  and  good  will  the  reorganized  system 
set  out  upon  its  career.  A  definite  programme  of  construction,  looking  to  the 
gradual  increase  of  the  water  supply  and  the  irrigated  area,  had  been  worked  out 
and  discussed  at  all  the  public  meetings.  The  first  step  in  this  programme  was  to 
build  the  dam  on  the  lower  part  of  Susan  River  to  provide  for  the  diversion  and  use 
of  flood  waters  in  accordance  with  the  stipulation  already  quoted.  The  results  of  this 
first  step  have  already  been  described  in  our  account  of  the  later  lawsuit.  It  was 
not  a  case  where  all  the  virtue  and  all  the  justice  lay  with  one  side,  and  it  may  there- 
fore be  worth  while  to  speak  of  the  merit  of  the  controversy  as  it  appeared  to  the 
contending  parties. 

Those  who  built  the  dam  supposed  they  had  a  right  to  take  all  the  waters  of 
Susan  River,  either  by  storage  or  by  diversion,  with  the  exception  of  1,000  inches 
from  March  1  to  July  1,  and  250  inches  thereafter,  which  had  been  expressly  reserved 
for  the  Tule  district.  It  was  clearly  understood  that  the  measurement  must  be  made 
immediately  above  the  mouth  of  Willow  Creek.  The  employees  of  the  company 
were  instructed  to  treat  Willow  Slough  as  the  true  channel  of  Willow  Creek  for  this 
purpose  and  to  measure  the  river  above  the  mouth  of  the  slough,  permitting  the 
required  amount  of  river  water,  together  with  the  entire  flow  of  Willow  Creek,  to 
pass  the  dam.  The  measurements  of  water  at  this  point  during  the  spring  of  1899 
are  given  in  an  earlier  page  of  this  report.  They  show  that  even  in  a  year  of  consid- 
erable drought  there  was  a  surplus  available  for  the  dam  and  its  new  canal  at  that 
point.  There  was  a  reason  of  the  highest  engineering  importance  why  the  dam 
should  be  located  below  the  mouth  of  Willow  Slough.  This  reason  is  found  in  the 
fact  that  Willow  Slough  is  a  natural  canal,  furnishing  a  connection  between  the  river 
and  a  system  of  proposed  reservoirs  on  the  north  side  of  the  valley.  By  making  use 
of  this  natural  canal  the  construction  of  an  artificial  waterway  for  a  long  distance, 
through  a  difficult  country,  was  avoided.  Since  the  California  law  distinctly  provides 
that  stored  waters  may  be  mingled  with  a  natural  stream  and  then  taken  out,  and 
since  there  was  no  legal  restriction  governing  the  point  of  diversion,  this  engineering 
reason  was  regarded  as  conclusive  as  to  the  location  of  the  dam. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  was  recognized  that  the  building  of  the  dam  at  this  point 
might  be  misunderstood,  and  that  a  structure  so  located  might  readily  be  used  so  as 
to  inflict  serious  injury  upon  farmers  living  lower  down  on  the  river.  But  the 
enterprise  was  regarded  as  essentially  a  public  undertaking.  It  had  been  organized 
with  the  approval  and  assistance  of  all  elements  of  the  community.  It  was  believed 
that  the  dam  could  be  operated  in  such  a  way  as  to  benefit  all  and  injure  none,  and  it 
was  expected  that  the  result  would  be  general  confidence  and  respect  for  the  enter- 
prise. The  dream  proved  Utopian.  The  dam,  as  built,  intercepted  the  entire  flow 
of  Willow  Creek.  It  might,  then,  be  used  to  deprive  the  Tule  settlers  of  every  drop 
of  water  except  1,000  inches.  In  this  case  their  homes  and  farms  would  be  dfesolatcd 


102  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

and  the  fruits  of  many  years'  labor  be  lost.  With  the  first  sign  of  dissatisfaction  the 
mischief -makers  on  both  sides  saw  their  opportunity.  It  was  hinted  to  the  Tule 
people  that  Willow  Creek  and  Willow  Slough  were  entirely  different  streams,  and 
that  if  they  received  their  quota  of  Susan  River  water  as  measured  immediately 
above  the  mouth  of  the  old  creek  they  would  have  no  cause  to  complain.  As  the 
tension  increased  the  intention  of  the  company  to  treat  Willow  Slough  as  the  proper 
point  of  measurement  assumed  the  proportions  of  a  defiance  and  was  later  set  up  ii 
the  defense  on  behalf  of  the  dam.  Nothing  further  was  needed  to  confirm  the 
suspicion  of  the  Tule  farmers  that  their  fortunes  were  menaced  by  the  policy  of 
the  new  company,  and  that  they  were  face  to  face  with  a  struggle  for  life.  The 
foolish  words  were  not  all  on  one  side.  Those  who  sympathized  with  the  Tule 
farmers  hinted  at  the  efficacy  of  dynamite,  and  the  farmers  themselves  later  attacked 
the  dam  and  removed  a  part  of  it.  Their  attorneys  sought  to  destroy  the  value  of 
the  former  stipulation  by  asserting  that  the  phrase  "to  store  and  use"  limited  the 
company's  rights  to  simple  storage  and  prohibited  diversion.  This  interpretation 
they  sought  to  narrow  so  that  storage  itself  was  limited  to  one  or  two  reservoirs 
begun  in  1893,  and  to  the  theory  that  even  these  could  be  filled  and  emptied  but  once 
each^year.  This  would  have  meant  the  destruction  of  the  foundation  on  which  the 
entire  enterprise  was  based.  Thus  on  both  sides  the  controversy  became  one  of  life 
and  death.  This  was  the  unfortunate  outcome  of  the  cooperative  effort  to  utilize  the 
water  supply  in  a  manner  to  secure  the  largest  measure  of  justice  and  prosperity 
for  all. 

The  plan  was  based  on  common  sense,  but  the  laws  did  not  permit  of  its  realization. 
Had  the  stipulation  been  so  definite  that  it  could  not  be  questioned,  and  had  there 
been  a  system  of  public  administration  under  which  no  works  could  be  undertaken 
except  with  the  approval  of  State  authority,  this  costly  and  demoralizing  incident 
would  not  be  a  part  of  the  valley's  history. 

CONTRACTS   OF   IRRIGATION    COMPANIES. 

Contracts  to  furnish  water  have  been  extensively  made  in  the  basin  by  the  various 
companies  which  at  one  time  or  another  sought  to  develop  the  water  supply.  As 
most  of  these  enterprises  failed,  there  has  been  little  litigation  on  the  subject.  But 
one  interesting  case  may  be  cited  which  goes  to  show  that  the  present  laws  and 
practice  are  no  more  favorable  to  this  kind  of  development  than  they  are  to  small 
private  ditches. 

In  the  case  referred  to  the  plaintiff  was  a  farmer  taking  water  from  the  prin- 
cipal irrigation  system  in  the  valley.  In  a  year  of  general  shortage,  owing  to  the 
light  snowfall  in  the  mountains,  he  claimed  that  his  crop  had  been  materially  dimin- 
ished because  the  company  had  undertaken  to  oversell  his  supply.  It  was  asserted 
in  the  complaint  that  only  1,600  acres  had  any  legal  right  to  receive  water  from  the 
system,  while  over  4,000  acres  were  being  served.  No  definite  amount  of  water  was 
promised  by  the  contract.  The  expression  was:  "  Sufficient  water  for  the  annual 
irrigation  of  the  tract  of  land  particularly  described."  There  was  therefore  no 
means  of  bringing  the  matter  to  the  test  of  actual  measurement  or  of  deciding  what 
constituted  "sufficient  water,"  except  by  going  into  court. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OB1    HoNKY    LAKE    BASIN.  103 

The  company  answered  in  part  by  quoting  the  following  provisions  of  the  con- 
tract itself: 

It  is  understood  and  agreed  that,  if  in  any  one  or  more  years  the  supply  of  water  in  said  irrigation 
system  shall  be  inadequate  for  the  proper  irrigation  of  all  the  lands  for  which  the  party  of  the  first 
part  may  have  agreed  to  supply  it,  then  in  such  case  the  priority  of  such  grant  and  agreement  shall 
give  no  priority  of  right  a*  against  those  having  similar  agreements,  although  of  later  date;  and  in  the 
event  of  such  inadequate  supply  all  parties  having  agreements  similar  to  this  with  the  party  of  the  first 
part  shall  be  entitled  to  receive  water  pro  rata;  that  is,  the  party  of  the  second  part  shall  be  entitled  to 
receive  the  same  quantity  of  water  per  acre  for  the  land  above  described  as  others  receive  per  acre  for 
their  lands  and  no  more. 

On  this  point  the  company  offered  evidence  to  show  that  the  owners  of  over  6,000 
acres  had  bought  and  paid  for  similar  water  rights  prior  to  the  plaintiff.  One  other 
material  point  in  the  contract  was  as  follows: 

That  it  is  understood  and  agreed,  that,  if  from  any  cause  the  said  irrigation  system  shall  during 
one  or  more  years  be  inadequate  to  furnish  a  sufficient  supply  of  water  to  produce  a  crop  upon  said 
land  of  the  party  of  the  second  part,  the  party  of  the  first  part  shall  not  be  liable  for  any  damages 
which  may  result  from  such  insufficient  supply. 

The  judgment  of  the  coui't  in  this  case  was  as  follows: 

Plaintiff  has  right  to  demand  and  receive  from  defendant  sufficient  water  from  its  system  to 
thoroughly  irrigate  all  crops  annually  grown  (on  lands  described).  It  is  ordered  that  defendant  fur- 
nish no  water  to  irrigate  any  land  in  excess  of  1,600  acres  from  its  irrigation  system  in  any  year  until 
plaintiff's  lands  are  fully  supplied  with  water.  Defendant  enjoined  from  furnishing  water  in  excess  of 
said  acreage  before  mentioned.  Seven  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  damages  and  costs  to  plaintiff. 

To  the  defendant  company  the  provisions  of  the  contract  seemed  very  clear.  In 
view  of  the  decision,  however,  it  would  appear  that  the  present  law  and  the  manner 
of  its  interpretation  furnish  very  little  protection  for  those  who  make  investments  of 

this  character. 

THE  NEEDED  REFORM  OF  CALIFORNIA  LAWS. 

The  evils' of  the  California  irrigation  laws,  as  clearly  disclosed  by  the  experience 
of  Honey  Lake  Basin,  may  be  briefly  summarized  as  follows: 

1.  The  laxness  of  'the  method  of  appropriation. — This  results  in  the  overappro- 
priation  of  streams  to  a  preposterous  degree,  in  the  posting  of  important  notices 
in  obscure  places,  in  the  keeping  of  public  records  difficult  of  access  and  almost 
wholly  indefinite  as  to  the  actual  status  of  existing  rights,  and  in  demoralizing  and 
interminable  strife  between  different  users  of  water  from  a  common  source. 

2.  The  failure  to  'ascertain  the  character  and  extent  of  water  supplies  by  public 
authority. — Without  such  official  data  there  can  be  no  safe  foundation  for  further 
development  and  no  intelligent  appropriation  of  water  for  any  purpose. 

'  3.  The  failure  to  assert  public  authority  over  the  construction  of  irrigation 
works. — This  results  in  the  building  of  dams,  canals,  and  reservoirs  which  may  be 
contrary  to  public  policy  and  a  menace  to  life  and  property. 

4-  The  failure  to  provide  just  methods  for  the  distribution  of  water  under  public 
authority. — This  leads  to  bitter  struggles  among  the  neighbors  to  obtain  sufficient 
water  for  the  satisfaction  of  their  rights  as  they  understand  them. 

5.  The  lack  of  any  method  of  establishing  the  reasonable  duty  of  water  in  different 
localities. — Without  an  agreement  on  this  subject  there  is  no  basis  for  an  intelligent 
decision  as  to  what  constitutes  "beneficial  use." 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

6.  The  confusion  resulting  from  the  recording  of  apprvjirifitioiis  In/  cent ;///'-> 
rather  tJian  by  streams. — This  is  especially  unfortunate  in  places  where  important 
streams  flow  from  one  county  into  another,  but  everywhere  it  is  desirable  to  have 
the  appropriations  upon  each  stream  brought  together  upon  the  records.    The  reason 
for  this  is  so  obvious  as  to  call  for  no  discussion. 

7.  The  failure  to  provide  a  method  for  settling  disputes  UIIKIIHJ  n-<.it<-r  users  less 
costly  and  more  expeditious  thorn  a  resort  to  the  courts  of  law. — In  the  petition  to  the 
Secretary  of  Agriculture,  which  resulted  in  the  present  inv.  stigation.  it  was  well 
said:  "Great  sums  have  been  lost  in  irrigation  enterprises.     Still  greater  sums  are 
endangered.     Water  titles  are  uncertain.     The  litigation  is  appalling." 

The  foregoing  enumeration  does  not  include  all  the  evils  arising  from  the 
present  laws.  There  is  another  class  even  more  fundamental  to  be  mentioned  later. 
But  every  one  of  the  evils  so  far  mentioned  may  be  cured  by  such  a  system  of 
administration  as  exists  in  other  States  of  the  arid  region.  K  seems  strange  that 
California,  ranking  first  among  her  sisters  in  the  irrigation  industry,  should  be  far 
behind  States  having  less  than  one-tenth  her  population  in  this  respect.  The  fact  is 
due  to  the  early  predominance  of  mining  over  agriculture,  as  evidenced  by  the 
decision  of  Chief  Justice  Murraj',  which  has  been  quoted.  Mining  diffused  the 
spirit  of  speculation  throughout  the  economic  life  of  California.  The  peculiar 
conditions  which  surround  the  agricultural  industry  were  not  appreciated,  and  the 
people  were  to  learn  their  needs  through  suffering  and  experience. 

Turning  from  this  Empire  State  of  the  West  to  Wyoming,  we  may  bring  into 
contrast  with  the  California  laws  a  system  of  administration  which  is  not  a  theory, 
but  a  practice. 

Wyoming  came  into  the  Union  with  an  irrigation  law  which  provided  for  :'. 
State  engineer  and  a  board  of  control,  and  for  water  divisions  corresponding  to 
natural  hydrographic  districts.  A  superintendent  is  placed  in  command  of  each 
district.  These  divisions  are  then  organized  into  several  subdivisions,  with  a  water 
commissioner  over  each.  In  division  No.  1  there  are  fourteen  subdivisions;  in 
division  No.  2,  six;  in  division  No.  3,  two;  and  in  division  No.  4,  three.  The  four 
superintendents  of  the  water  divisions  constitute  the  board  of  control,  over  which 
the  State  engineer  presides.  Thus  the  smallest  ditch  on  the  remotest  stream  in 
Wyoming  is  brought  into  close  and  intimate  touch  with  the  central  authority  at  the 
capital  of  the  State.  Here  complete  records  of  all  appropriations  and  all  adjudica- 
tions are  kept,  and  to  this  same  central  authority  must  come  all  applications  for  new 
rights.  No  appropriation  can  become  actually  operative  until  the  State  engineer's 
office  has  passed  upon  it  and  determined  that  the  water  is  available  to  meet  the  new 
demand.  Not  only  so,  but  the  same  authority  passes  upon  the  works  to  be  built, 
and  must  know  that  they  are  of  proper  character,  and  that  the  proposed  construction 
will  conform  to  public  policy,  before  it  will  issue  the  necessary  permit.  It  will  be 
readily  seen  that  such  provisions  eliminate  at  a  stroke  many  evils  which  have 
furnished  the  basis  for  litigation  in  California  and  many  risks  which  have  over- 
whelmed irrigation  enterprise  with  disaster.  But  this  is  by  no  means  all  the  good 
accomplished  by  the  Wyoming  system  of  administration. 

It  is  the  business  of  the  State  engineer  and  his  assistants  to  thoroughly  explore 
the  water  resources  of  the  State.  Streams  are  regularly  gaged,  and  the  results  shown 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  105 

by  a  system,  of  charts  and  diagrams  exhibiting  the  variations  in  the  stream  at  different 
seasons  of  the  year.  Flood  waters  and  storage  possibilities  are  also  closely  investi- 
gated, and  enterprises  of  this  character  may  be  undertaken  with  a  degree  of  safety 
not  possible  when  it  is  necessary  to  rely  wholly  upon  the  reports  of  private  engineers. 
This  thorough  study  of  water  supplies  furnishes  a  foundation  upon  which  appro- 
priations may  be  based.  Another  very  important  feature  of  the  Wyoming  law  is 
that  which  provides  for  the  adjudication  of  rights  on  the  basis  of  actual  beneficial 
use.  The  constitution  adopted  when  Wyoming  was  admitted  to  statehood  provided 
for  a  careful  review  and  readjustment  of  all  appropriations,  and  compelled  those  who 
were  using  public  waters  to  show  that  they  were  applying  them  economically  and 
usefully,  or  to  renounce  their  claim  upon  so  much  of  them  as  they  were  wasting. 
Priority  was  scrupulously  recognized,  but  waste  was  forbidden  and  efficient  means 
taken  to  prevent  it. 

One  of  the  most  important  reforms  effected  by  the  Wyoming  law  concerned  the 
distribution  of  water.  The  commissioners  in  charge  of  the  twenty-five  subdivisions 
are.  placed  in  absolute  authority  on  this  score.  They  and  their  assistants  are  vested 
with  police  powers,  and  it  is  their  business  to  patrol  the  canals  and  see  that  the  law 
is  rigorously  enforced.  There  is  here  no  opportunity  for  one  neighbor  to  interfere 
with  another's  headgate.  The  water  commissioner  knows  the  appropriations  which 
have  been  allowed  and  the  order  of  their  priority.  He  alone  has  any  right  to  handle 
the  headgates  and  direct  the  course  of  the  waters.  He  is  responsible  for  the  delivery 
of  the  supply  and  for  its  measurement.  Complaints  seldom  arise  because  very  little 
has  been  left  open  to  dispute,  but  when  they  do  they  are  not  filtered  through  the 
courts,  but  placed  immediately  before  the  board  of  control.  This  is  a  body  composed 
of  irrigation  experts  and  practical  irrigators  who  have  been  supplied  with  every 
facility  required  for  the  work  of  administration.  There  may  be  an  appeal  to  the 
courts,  but  it  is  very  seldom  taken,  since  everybody  knows  that  the  board  of  control 
is  best  suited  to  deal  with  the  subject  and  that  the  entire  water  system  of  the  State  is 
built  on  the  foundations  of  eternal  justice. 

The  settler  who  makes  his  home  in  Wyoming  and  the  investor  who  places  his 
money  there  both  know  at  the  beginning  the  matter  and  extent  of  their  rights,  and 
they  know  that  these  will  have  the  fullest  protection.  In  California  neither  the  set- 
tler nor  the  investor  can  possibly  kno.w  the  precise  nature  and  extent  of  his  rights — 
they  can  only  know  that  they  are  likely  to  be  involved  in  lawsuits  and  that  the 
final  result  must  be  the  survival  of  the  fittest,  fitness  being  determined  by  the  ability 
to  meet  the  expenses  of  litigation.  And  yet  the  natural  conditions  for  irrigation 
development  are  infinitely  more  favorable  in  California  than  in  Wyoming.  The 
difference  is  simply  a  code  of  laws.  It  would  be  moderate  to  say  that  if  the  Wyoming 
laws  could  be  bodily  transferred  to  the  statutes  of  California  the  fact  would  be  worth 
millions  of  dollars  every  year  to  the  latter. 

PRIVATE  OB  PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP  OF  WATER. 

In  California,  water  is  private  property.  Once  appropriated,  it  may  be  used  for 
anv  purpose  to  the  extent  of  the  ditch  or  flume  constructed  for  its  reception.  It  may 
be  sold  or  rented.  It  may  be  used  first  at  one  place  and  then  at  another;  first  for  one 
purpose  and  then  for  an  entirely  different  purpose.  It  is  absolutely  the  property  of 


106  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

the  person  who  acquires  title  to  it,  as  much  as  his  horse  or  cow,  and  the  public  has 
no  more  concern  with  it  than  with  any  other  commodity  belonging  to  a  private 
individual,  except  that  where  water  is  appropriated  for  "sale,  rental,  or  distribution" 
the  public  has  retained  the  power  to  fix  the  rates  at  which  it  shall  be  disposed  of. 
This  would  be  unfortunate  enough  if  it  applied  only  to  those  who  had  acquired  title 
under  some  semblance  of  beneficial  use,  but  the  California  doctrine  of  private  water 
ownership  does  not  stop  there.  Riparian  owners  are  entitled  to  "the  natural  and 
usual  flow  of  all  the  water,  unless  where  the  quantity  has  been  diminished  as  a 
consequence  of  the  reasonable  application  of  it  by  other  riparian  owners,"  and  such 
"reasonable  application"  includes  "a  reasonable  use  of  .the  waters  of  the  stream  for 
purposes  of  irrigation."  True,  one  part  of  the  State  code  says  that  "the  right  to 
the  use  of  running  water  flowing  in  a  river  or  stream  or  down  a  canyon  or  ravine 
may  be  acquired  by  appropriation."  But  another  part  of  the  code  distinctly  provides 
that  the  rights  of  riparian  proprietors  are  exempted  from  the  operations  of  this  law 
of  appropriation.  In  its  decision  of  the  famous  case  of  Lux  v.  Haggin,  from  which 
the  above  interpretation  of  riparian  rights  is  taken,  the  supreme  court  of  California 
laid  great  emphasis  upon  the  fact  that  the  rights  of  appropriation  conferred  by  the 
code  could  not  and  did  not  affect  riparian  rights  as  established  by  the  English  common 
law.  The  California  statutes,  and  all  the  decisions  based  upon  them,  make  riparian 
rights  paramount  to  rights  acquired  by  appropriation  and  actual  beneficial  use.  This 
amounts  to  carrying  the  doctrine  of  private  ownership  to  its  last  extremity. 

The  experience  of  other  States  and  of  all  foreign  countries  has  demonstrated  that 
this  doctrine  is  untenable  in  arid  lands.  It  is  recognized  that  water  is  a  form  of 
natural  wealth,  which  in  the  best  interests  of  society  must  never  pass  beyond  public 
control.  World-wide  experience  and  world-wide  authorities  agree  that  there  can  be 
no  private  interest  in  water  save  that  which  inheres  in  actual  beneficial  use.  The 
community  has  an  interest  in  every  drop  of  water  which  enters  at  the  headgate  or 
escapes  at  the  end  of  the  canal.  This  is  so  because  in  an  arid  land  the  extent  of  the 
water  supply  is  the  measure  of  the  country's  possible  wealth  and  of  its  ability  to 
support  the  social  and  economic  structure.  To  a  very  marked  degree  water  control 
must  be  socialistic  in  its  nature.  This  has  been  recognized  in  the  legislation  and 
plans  of  administration  adopted  in  other  States  and  countries.  Where  the  most 
enlightened  laws  prevail  title  to  water  rests  not  in  individuals,  but  in  the  lands  to 
which  it  was  originally  and  perpetually  dedicated.  Land  and  water  are  treated  as 
inalienable.  The  one  can  not  be  disposed  of  without  the  other.  There  can  no  more 
be  traffic  in  water  than  in  sunshine  or  air.  All  three  are  alike  essential  to  the  existence 
of  human  and  vegetable  life  in  arid  lands.  A  monopoly  of  one  of  these  elements 
would  be  as  inimical  to  the  public  good  as  a  monopoly  of  either  of  the  others.  Air 
and  sunshine  are  diffused  without  human  effort.  Water  must  be  controlled  and 
directed,  and  since  there  is  much  less  than  enough  to  supply  the  demand  there  must 
be  laws  providing  for  the  protection  of  those  who  have  acquired  the  rights  to  its  use. 
But  these  laws  must  recognize  the  paramount  public  interest  and  must  see  that  it  is 
distributed  with  the  same  scrupulous  regard  for  the  inherent  rights  of  humanity  as 
the  scanty  provisions  of  a  besieged  city.  Such  is  the  doctrine  of  the  most  enlightened 
communities  which  have  dealt  with  irrigation.  To  hold  to  the  private  ownership  of 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OP    HONEY    LAKE    HASINA  107 

water  is  to  say  that  an  arid  land  shall  remain  a  wilderness  or  that  its  people  shall  bear 
the  yoke  of  servitude.  The  one  result  would  be  destructive  of  industry  and  commerce, 
the  other  of  the  best  ideals  of  civilization. 

All  the  evils  of  the  California  practice  enumerated  at  the  beginning  of  this 
cction  may  be  speedily  cured  by  a  proper  system  of  administration,  but  the  more 
fundamental  evils  arising  from  the  vicious  doctrine  of  private  ownership  of  water  can 
t>e  reached  only  by  heroic  treatment.  The  only  remedy  suggested  by  the  supreme 
court  of  the  State  is  the  assertion  of  the  right  of  eminent  domain,  under  which  riparian 
titles  could  be  condemned  and  taken  for  public  uses  upon  payment  of  just  compensa- 
tion. While  other  methods  might  be  suggested,  a  remedy  even  as  costly  as  this 
would  prove  a  good  investment. 

THE  LARGER  IRRIGATION  PROBLEM  OF  THE  BASIN. 

While  a  good  system  of  administration  would  eliminate  nearly  all  friction  and 
litigation  among  water  users  in  Honey  Lake  Basin,  and  to  that  extent  furnish 
encouragement  for  future  enterprises,  it  would  not  of  itself  solve  the  large  irrigation 
problem  of  the  valley.  There  are  now  about  20,000  acres  in  cultivation  under  ditches. 
This  is  practically  the  limit  of  the  area  that  may  be  reclaimed  by  small  works  depend- 
ing upon  the  perennial  flow  of  streams.  The  larger  problem  is  concerned  with  the 
reclamation  of  a  great  area  of  sagebrush  lands  extending  from  the  foothills  of  the 
Sierra  Nevada  Mountains  to  the  neighborhood  of  Pyramid  Lake,  in  Nevada.  This 
district  includes  more  than  200,000  acres  of  arable  land.  What  portion  of  it  would 
be  actually  susceptible  of  irrigation,  in  case  the  water  supplies  of  the  region  were 
developed  to  their  fullest  capacity,  has  not  been  definitely  determined,  but  the  area 
which  might  be  reclaimed  under  these  conditions  would  make  homes  for  many 
thousands  of  people  and  support  a  very  considerable  railroad  and  commercial  traffic. 

THE  FAILURE  OF  PAST  ENTERPRISES. 

The  opportunity  which  exists  here  for  large  enterprises  has  not  failed  to  attract 
the  attention  of  the  public  in  the  past.  There  have  been  several  periods  of  active 
effort  during  the  past  twenty  years.  This  is  the  significance  of  the  vast  claims  which 
have  been  noticed  in  earlier  pages  of  this  report.  The  scene  of  these  efforts  has 
included  all  the  large  sources  of  water  supply — the  headwaters  of  Susan  River,  Eagle 
Lake,  Balls  Canyon,  Long  Valley,  and  Skedaddle  Creek.  A  conservative  estimate  of 
the  investment  represented  by  all  these  undertakings  would  be  $500,000,  and  perhaps 
double  that  sum  would  be  no  exaggeration  if  the  interest  accumulation  were  included. 
For  all  that  expenditure  not  more  than  5,000  acres  are  actually  irrigated  from  the 
systems  which  were  begun,  so  that  it  might  be  said  that  for  each  acre  irrigated  by 
these  undertakings  from  $100  to  $200  was  spent  in  cash.  In  view  of  the  fact  that 
the  average  first  cost  of  irrigating  land  throughout  the  arid  region,  as  shown  by  the 
census  of  1890,  was  $8.15  per  acre,  this  would  argue  that  there  have  been  serious 
miscalculations  or  unusual  disasters  to  contend  with  in  Honey  Lake  Basin.  Such  is 
the  actual  fact.  Of  the  many  large  enterprises  projected  or  undertaken  only  one 
has  anything  substantial  to  show  for  the  results.  Even  this  is  far  from  completion 
and  groaning  heavily  under  the  burdens  imposed  by  unfavorable  conditions. 


108  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  failure  of  past  enterprises  was  chiefly  due  to  two  facts.  In  the  first  place, 
everything  was  undertaken  without  sufficient  knowledge,  since  the  State  has  left  its 
citizens  wholly  in  the  dark  regarding  the  irrigation  industry.  Without  scientific 
investigation  of  water  resources  and  intelligent  public  supervision  of  projected 
works,  the  tempting  opportunities  for  reclamation  and  settlement  offered  by 
the  natural  conditions  of  this  basin  proved  simply  an  invitation  to  disaster.  Large 
sums  were  expended  in  trying  to  get  water  from  sources  and  by  methods  which 
were  problematical  at  best.  Costly  earth  dams  were  erected  where  they  could  not 
hope  to  withstand  the  first  flood.  The  result  was  peer  .iary  loss  for  investors  and 
disappointments  and  hardship  for  settlers.  These  misfortunes,  which  would  have 
been  prevented  by  a  system  of  administration  like  that  of  Wyoming,  gave  the 
country  a  bad  name  and  injured  the  entire  community. 

In  the  second  place,  it  has  proven  extremely  difficult  to  command  large  capital 
for  the  irrigation  industry.  This  is  due  in  part  to  the  uncertainties  arising  from  the 
California  law,  but  yet  more  to  the  ill  repute  of  irrigation  securities  in  general. 
These  enterprises  require  large  sums  and,  even  under  the  most  favorable  conditions, 
the  returns  are  likely  to  be  long  delayed,  since  much  time  is  necessarily  consumed 
in  establishing  the  industrial  economy  of  a  new  country  and  bringing  it  to  a  point 
where  it  may  pay  regular  dividends  to  capital.  The  results  of  private  investment  in 
this  field  have  been  such  as  to  lead  many  conservative  men  to  favor  some  form  of 
public  enterprise,  though  opposed  to  this  method  in  other  lines. 

But  in  spite  of  past  failures  the  rich  lands  of  Honey  Lake  Basin  must  be 
reclaimed.  The  territory  is  needed  for  the  homes  of  men  and  the  desert  must  be 
made  to  give  place  to  the  field,  the  garden,  and  the  orchard.  It  will  be  profitable  to 
examine  the  several  methods  by  which  this  might  be  accomplished  and  to  consider 
which  of  these  is  best  adapted  to  the  situation. 

THE  WATER-BIGHT  SYSTEM. 

Nearly  all  the  enterprises  thus  far  undertaken  in  the  basin  have  been  planned  on 
the  familiar  lines  providing  for  the  sale  of  water  rights  and  the  collection  of  annual 
rentals.  The  price  of  rights  ranged  from  f 5  to  $10  per  acre  and  the  water  rentals 
from  $1  to  $1.50  per  acre.  Those  who  planned  companies  in  this  way  expected  to 
recover  their  entire  investment,  and  perhaps  more,  from  the  sale  of  water  rights. 
In  that  event  the  annual  rentals  would  pay  dividends  on  fictitious  capital  besides 
meeting  the  maintenance  charge.  Pleasing  as  the  plan  looks  on  paper  it  has  never 
produced  the  expected  financial  returns.  It  has  now  been  swept  away  by  the  decision 
of  Judge  Ross,  of  the  United  States  circuit  court  for  the  southern  district  of  Cali- 
fornia, rendered  in  the  famous  San  Diego  case.  The  conclusion  is  that  there  can  be 
no  such  thing  as  a  water  right  in  the  sense  that  these  companies  and  their  consumers 
understood  it.  Landowners  having  property  under  an  irrigation  canal  have  an 
inherent  right  to  demand  water  from  that  canal  by  tendering  the  price  of  it.  This 
price  must  be  fixed  on  the  basis  of  reasonable  interest  upon  the  actual  investment. 
The  price  is  subject  to  review  and  revision  by  the  county  board  of  supervisors,  who 
can  not,  however,  fix  it  at  less  than  6  per  cent  nor  more  than  18  per  cent  interest  on 
the  investment.  This  would  usually  mean  the  minimum  amount,  which  is  hardly 
sufficient  to  tempt  investment  into  this  unpopular  field.  Furthermore,  the  provision 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  109 

forgiving  the  supervisors  the  power  to  make  the  rates  is  open  to  many  objections. 
It  is  hardly  to  be  expected  that  Honey  Lake  Basin  will  be  reclaimed  by  this  method. 

THE   COOPERATIVE    CANAL. 

The  cooperative  company,  chartered  to  furnish  water  exclusively  to  its  own 
stockholders  and  operated  with  no  expectation  of  dividends,  is  free  from  most  of  the 
objections  which  attach  to  private  canals.  Theoretically,  at  least,  it  supplies  water 
at  actual  cost  and  imposes  no  hardships  upon  the  consumers.  But  there  is  the  same 
difficulty  in  commanding  large  capital,  and  it  is  gravely  to  be  feared  that  the  natural 
limitations  of  this  method  will  not  permit  of  its  application  to  great  undertakings. 
If  the  bonds  of  such  enterprises  could  be  readily  floated  at  low  interest,  and  if  popular 
initiative  could  oe  trusted  to  evolve  administrative  methods  equal  to  the  needs  of 
such  a  system,  this  would  furnish  a  happy  solution  of  the  larger  irrigation  problems. 
But  the  truth  is  that  both  the  capital  and  the  management  necessary  for  such  under- 
takings are  extremely  difficult  to  command  in  cooperative  enterprises.  Where  it  is 
only  a  question  of  building  a  small  local  ditch  the  case  is  entirely  different. 

POSSIBILITIES   OF   THE    CAREY  LAW. 

Oddly  enough,  California  has  thus  far  declined  to  accept  the  grant  of  1,000,000 
acres  of  arid  public  land  offered  by  the  Carey  law  enacted  in  1894.  The  provisions 
of  this  act  are  much  more  favorable  to  irrigation  development  than  the  land  laws 
which  have  been  utilized  in  Honey  Lake  Basin — that  is,  the  homestead  law  and  the 
desert-land  law.  Under  the  Carey  act,  if  supplemented  with  appropriate  State 
legislation,  the  irrigable  lands  in  Honey  Lake  Basin  could  be  withdrawn  from  settle 
ment.  The  State  would  then  advertise  for  bids  of  construction  companies  desiring 
to  build  the  necessary  works  to  reclaim  these  lands.  If  the  Wyoming  example  were 
followed,  the  construction  company  would  look  for  its  return  to  the  sale  of  shares  in 
the  canal,  which  is  based  upon  a  cooperative  basis.  The  price  of  the  land  would  be 
fixed  at  50  cents  per  acre.  The  State  would  fix  the  maximum  price  which  could  be 
charged  for  water  shares.  In  Wyoming  the  maximum  price  fixed  has  varied  from 
$10  to  $16  per  acre,  so  that  the  settler  pa}rs  from  $10. 50  to  $16.50  per  acre  for  water 
and  land.  He  is  then  joint  owner  in  the  irrigation  works,  and  in  the  end  the  entire 
control  passes  into  the  hands  of  himself  and  his  neighbors.  This  plan  is  a  great 
improvement  over  the  past  methods  from  the  financial  standpoint.  For  all  practical 
purposes,  the  entire  tract  of  land  to  be  reclaimed  serves  as  the  basis  of  security  for 
the  capital  employed  in  the  work.  This  is  so  because  the  land  office  will  permit 
entries  on  this  tract  only  from  those  who  bring  evidence  that  they  have  contracted 
for  the  purchase  of  shares  in  the  canal.  Thus,  those  who  furnish  the  capital  know 
that  these  lands  can  not  be  occupied  except  as  the  capital  is  repaid  with  whatever 
pi'ofit  is  permitted  by  the  maximum  price  fixed  by  the  State.  In  arriving  at  this 
maximum  the  State  must  take  all  contingencies  into  consideration  and  allow  a  price 
sufficient  to  reimburse  the  investment,  otherwise  no  construction  company  will 
undertake  the  work.  This  plan  also  disposes  of  any  vexations  which  attach  to  the 
homestead  and  desert-land  laws  and  which  have  proven  equally  unsatisfactory  to 
settlers  and  to  irrigation  companies. 


110  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

STATE  AND  NATIONAL  WORKS. 

The  most  popular  method  of  reclaiming  these  arid  lands  would  be  to  have  the 
National  Government  do  the  work  and  foot  the  bill.  The  theory  that  "a  national 
debt  is  a  national  blessing"  still  widely  prevails  and  is  especially  popular  in  the 
locality  where  it  is  proposed  to  expend  the  proceeds  of  the  debt.  If  the  policy  of 
national  works  is  to  be  adopted — and  it  must  be  admitted  that  it  has  gathered  strength 
rapidly  in  recent  years — it  might  well  be  applied  to  Honey  Lake  Basin.  Even  if 
goodly  appropriations  should  be  inaugurated  at  an  early  day,  many  beautiful  valleys 
would  have  to  wait  long  for  their  turn  to  come.  Honey  Lake  Basin,  hidden  away  in 
the  pockets  of  the  Sierras  and  off  the  line  of  transcontinental  travel,  might  be  expected 
to  wait  indefinitely. 

State  works  of  reclamation  are  quite  as  feasible  as  national  works.  So  far  as 
this  locality  is  concerned,  it  is  to  be  feared  they  are  also  quite  as  remote.  Taxation 
of  the  entire  State  for  the  benefit  of  particulaj-  neighborhoods  would  meet  with 
severe  opposition.  There  is  no  doubt  that  it  could  be  justified  on  the  highest  public 
grounds,  but  it  requires  a  broad  view  to  see  that  this  is  so,  and  broad  views  on  this 
subject  are  not  likely  to  be  entertained  in  a  State  having  so  large  a  percentage  of  its 
population  dwelling  in  localities  only  indirectly  benefited  by  irrigation.  State 
appropriations  for  storage  enterprises,  if  realized  at  all,  are  likely  to  be  expended  in 
localities  immediately  tributary  to  important  towns  and  transportation  lines  and  not 
at  the  back  door  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  passes. 

The  conclusion  is  that  Honey  Lake  Basin  can  only  be  reclaimed  at  an  early  day- 
say  within  ten  or  twenty  years — as  the  result  of  laws  which  shall  make  investment 
safe  and  profitable,  or  which  shall  permit  the  people  to  tax  themselves  intelligently 
and  effectively  for  their  own  benefit. 

HOPE  IN  THE  DISTRICT  SYSTEM. 

There  has  been  no  more  notable  failure  in  the  history  of  California  development 
than  that  of  the  irrigation-district  system.  It  is  perhaps  also  true  that  there  is  no 
better  hope  of  salvation  for  many  localities  than  the  district  system,  if  it  be  perfected 
in  the  light  of  experience.  This  bravo  effort  to  water  the  fertile  lands  of  California 
and  make  them  ready  for  a  future  population  failed  because  of  its  administrative 
weakness  and  the  difficulty  encountered  in  raising  promptly,  and  on  favorable  terms, 
the  very  large  sums  of  capital  required.  It  is  perfectly  feasible  to  eliminate  both  of 
these  difficulties.  A  competent  State  engineer  and  board  of  control  could  pass 
intelligently  on  the  need  of  works  in  a  given  locality  and  determine  what  should  be 
their  character  and  what  their  reasonable,  cost.  The  same  official  body  could  exert 
its  influence  and  power  in  supervising  the  details  of  administration  in  each  local 
district.  It  would  be  equally  easy  to  surmount  the  financial  difficulty.  The  State 
could  well  afford  to  pledge  its  own  credit  in  support  of  the  district  bonds.  It  could 
sell  its  own  bonds  readily  at  3  per  cent  interest,  depositing  in  its  treasury  the  5  per 
cent  bonds  of  the  district  and  making  the  difference  in  interest  pay  all  the  expenses 
of  administration.  It  would  then  be  no  longer  necessary  for  the  district  financial 
agents  to  hawk  their  securities  in  the  money  markets  of  the  world,  selling  them  at 
all  sorts  of  prices  or  exchanging  them  with  contractors  for  doubtful  consideration. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKK    BASIN.  Ill 

Both  the  money  and  the  brains,  which  the  district  system  has  lacked,  would  thus  he 
supplied.  The  State  would  risk  nothing  in  the  operation;  the  districts  would  gain 
everything.  The  burden  of  taxation  would  rest  where  it  belongs — on  those  who  are 
to  receive  the  benefits.  There  would  be  no  weary  waiting  of  years  for  State  or 
Federal  schemes  to  materialize  and  to  reach  those  remote  neighborhoods  which  have 
few  citizens  and  fewer  outside  friends.  There  would  be  no  more  heart-breaking 
private  enterprises  dealing  with  undertakings  beyond  their  grasp. 

Let  us  apply  this  principle  to  existing  conditions  in  Honey  Lake  Valley.  Sup- 
pose there  are  150,000  acres  to  be  irrigated  without  crossing  the  line  into  Nevada. 
A  high  estimate  of  cost  when  the -work  is  done  upon  a  large  scale  would  be  $5  per 
acre,  or  a  total  cost  of  $750,000  for  work  alone.  It  would  be  necessary  to  purchase, 
either  by  negotiation  or  condemnation  proceedings,  most  of  the  existing  canals  and 
all  riparian  rights.  Probably  this  could  be  done  for  less  than  $500,000;  but  it  is 
well  to  add  $250,000  for  contingencies.  This  brings  the  sum  total  to  $1,500,000,  or 
a  bonded  indebtedness  of  $10  per  acre.  This  debt  would  rest  not  alone  upon  the 
agricultural  lands,  but  also  upon  all  other  real  property  in  the  district  to  be  benefited 
by  irrigation  and  the  growth  of  population.  The  annual  interest  charge  would  be 
$75,000,  to  be  collected  from  all  the  lands  at  the  rate  of  50  cents  per  acre.  Another 
50  cents  would  probably  meet  the  cost  of  administration,  making  the  annual  assess- 
ment for  all  fixed  charges  $1.  Under  the  district  law,  as  recently  amended,  districts 
may  simply  pay  interest  for  the  first  twenty  years,  and  begin  the  accumulation  of  a 
sinking  fund  with  the  twenty-first  year.  The  bonds  run  forty  years,  so  that  there  is 
another  twenty  years  for  the  payment  of  the  principal  of  the  debt.  The  debt  of  $10 
per  acre  can  be  retired  at  the  rate  of  50  cents  per  acre  each  year,  beginning  with  the 
twenty-first,  which,  added  to  the  fixed  charges,  calls  for  $1.50  as  the  total  assessment. 
This  could  impose  no  hardship  upon  the  landowners,  especially  if  the  national  laws 
be  revised  so  as  to  cut  down  the  entries  to  40  acres,  or  to  80  acres,  at  the  most. 

In  the  foregoing  figures  liberal  allowances  have  been  made  for  each  item.  It  is 
quite  possible  that  the  debt  could  be  kept  down  to  $7.50  an  acre,  or  even  $5  per 
acre.  The  entire  construction  fund  need  not  be  expended  at  one  time.  The  situation 
is  peculiarly  favorable  to  the  gradual  extension  of  works.  They  could  be  extended 
each  year  to  meet  the  growth  of  settlement,  and  the  money  not  employed  in  the 
works  could  be  placed  at  interest  so  as  to  relieve  the  taxpayers  of  that  portion  of  the 
burden.  The  manner  in  which  settlers  have  rushed  to  the  valley  when  large  works 
have  been  projected  in  the  past,  and  the  fact  that  there  is  perhaps  not  one  instance  of 
failure  on  the  part  of  farmers  who  have  actually  had  water  for  their  land,  go  far  to 
prove  that  under  such  a  system  of  public  works  the  people  could  cheerfully  meet  the 
financial  demand  which  would  be  made  upon  them  and  realize  satisfactory  returns 
for  themselves.  Of  the  various  methods  suggested  for  reclaiming  Honey  Lake 
Basin,  the  district  system,  with  such  revision  as  has  been  suggested,  is  probably  the 
best. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

After  this  extended  study  of  the  conditions  presented  by  Honey  Lake  Basin,  and 
of  the  operation  of  water  and  land  laws,  State  and  national,  we  are  prepared  to 
suggest  some  of  the  conclusions  to  which  we  are  inevitably  led. 


IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  plain  that  here  is  a  region  now  sparsely  populated,  and  that 
sparse  population  contending  among  themselves  for  the  precious  water  which  is  the 
lifeblood  of  their  homes  and  farms,  which  might  readily  sustain  tens  of  thousands. 

In  the  second  place,  it  is  equally  plain  that  development  has  reached  and  perhaps 
overstepped  its  limits  under  existing  laws  and  methods. 

If,  then,  there  is  to  be  progress  in  the  future,  and  if  the  potentialities  of  this 
splendid  valley  are  to  be  realized  and  placed  within  the  reach  of  those  who  need  them. 
the  laws  which  now  operate  to  repress  and  discourage  enterprise  must  be  changed 
and  the  measures  essential  to  larger  progress  must  be  provided. 

To  a  very  large  extent  the  work  of  reform  and  of  constructive  legislation  which 
is  needed  is  wholly  within  the  power  of  California  itself.  There  are  important  things 
to  be  done  by  the  National  Government,  but  these  are  comparatively  simple,  and 
would  naturally  follow  upon  the  adoption  of  a  vigorous  State  policy.  The  most 
important  steps  that  might  be  suggested  to  the  State  are  these: 

1.  Creation  of  the  office  of  State  engineer. — The  duty  of  this  official  should  be  as 
follows: 

(a)  To  make  measurements  and  calculations  of  the  discharge  of  streams  from 
which  water  shall  be  taken  for  beneficial  purposes,  beginning  with  streams  most 
in  use. 

(5)  To  collect  facts  and  make  surveys  to  determine  the  most  suitable  location  for 
constructing  works  for  utilizing  water,  and  to  ascertain  the  location  of  the  lands  best 
suited  for  irrigation. 

(c)  To  examine  reservoir  sites  and  report  to  the  State  all  facts  ascertained, 
including,  wherever  practicable,  estimates  of  the  cost  of  proposed  irrigation  works 
and  improvements. 

(d)  To  make  plans  looking  to  the  apportionment  of  the  State  into  several  grand 
divisions  based  on  hydrographic  lines  as  a  foundation  for  a  system  of  administration. 

(e)  To  make  annual  reports  to  the  governor  covering  the  operations  of  his 
department  and  recommendations  for  needed  legislation. 

The  State  engineer  should  have  power  to  employ  such  assistance  as  he  may  need 
in  the  performance  of  his  duties. 

2.  Creation  of  board  of  control. — This  body  should  consist  of  the  superintend- 
ents of  the  several  grand  hydrographic  divisions.     The  duty  of  the  board  should  be 
as  follows: 

(a)  To  make  regulations  governing  the  distribution  of  water  on  the  various 
streams  of  the  State. 

(5)  To  appoint  water  commissioners,  with  police  powers,  to  supervise  the 
distribution  of  water  in  accordance  with  the  regulations. 

(c)  To  cooperate  with  the  State  engineer  in  the  general  work  of  administration 

(d)  To  hear  and  pass  upon  all  complaints  arising  from  the  administration  of  the 
law  in  the  various  divisions  of  the  State.     The  decisions  of  the  board  of  control 
would  be  subject  to  review  by  the  courts. 

3.  Modification  of  riparian  rights. — The  best  use  of  the  water  resources  of 
California  demands  the  modification  or  complete  abolition  of  the  doctrine  of  riparian 
rights  and  the  theory  of  private  ownership  in  water  apart  from  the  right  of  use. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    OF    HONEY    LAKE    BASIN.  113 

This  could  he  accomplished  by  new  legislation  designed  to  facilitate  condemnation 
proceedings,  and  perhaps  to  make  provision  from  the  public  treasury  for  the 
purchase  of  riparian  rights  and  the  dedication  of  waters  so  obtained  to  public  uses. 
It  would  be  far  more  satisfactory,  however,  to  lay  the  ax  at  the  root  of  the  evil  by 
changing  the  constitution  of  the  State.  The  following  quotations  from  the  constitu- 
tion of  Wyoming  are  of  interest  in  this  connection: 

Water  being  essential  to  industrial  prosperity,  of  limited  amount,  and  easy  of  diversion  from  its 
natural  channels,  its  control  must  be  in  the  State,  which,  in  providing  for  its  use,  shall  equally  guard 
all  the  various  interests  involved. 

The  water  of  all  natural  streams,  springs,  lakes,  or  other  collections  of  still  water  within  the 
boundaries  of  the  State  are  hereby  declared  to  be  the  property  of  the  State. 

These  constitutional  provisions,  supplemented  by  wise  laws  of  appropriation 
and  administration — laws  which  recognize  no  right  except  the  right  of  beneficial  use 
and  which  join  water  and  land  inalienably  and  perpetually — furnish  the  only  true 
and  satisfactory  basis  for  the  control  of  water  under  the  theory  of  public  ownership. 
It  would  require  at  least  two  years  to  effect  this  sweeping  change  in  California 
institutions,  and  perhaps  much  longer.  In  the  meantime  the  laws  of  appropriation 
could  be  amended  and  improved,  the  system  of  administration  organized  and  set  at 
work,  and  the  scientific  study  of  water  resources  far  advanced. 

4-  Improvement  of  the  district  law. — This  should  be  accomplished  in  two  ways, 
as  follows: 

(a)  By  having  the  State  guarantee  the  bonds  of  such  districts  as  shall  have  been 
authorized,  after  due  investigation,  by  the  board  of  control. 

(5)  By  making  the  administration  of  such  districts  subject  to  the  supervision  of 
the  State  engineer  and  board  of  control. 

5.  Acceptance  of  tJie  land  grant  provided  In/  the  Carey  act. — This  would  enable 
the  State  to  select  1,000,000  acres  of  arid  public  land  and  to  make  regulations  of  its 
own  looking  to  its  reclamation  and  disposal  to  settlers.  There  are  many  places  in 
the  State  where  the  acceptance  of  this  grant,  if  supplemented  by  appropriate  legis- 
lation, would  contribute  to  the  solution  of  the  irrigation  problem. 

In  addition  to  the  State  legislation  suggested  in  the  foregoing,  it  is  very 
desirable  that  national  action  should  be  had  for  the  protection  of  the  forests  and  the 
reform  of  existing  land  laws.  The  amount  of  land  which  settlers  may  acquire  from 
the  public  domain  for  irrigation  should  be  reduced.  Eighty  acres  are  sufficient  in 
anj'  part  of  the  State,  and  40  acres  would  be  a  better  unit  in  most  localities. 

Under  the  existing  laws  of  State  and  nation,  Honey  Lake  Basin  is  practically 
bound  hand  and  foot.  There  is  an  abundance  of  land  and  of  water.  There  is  an 
insistent  and  growing  demand  for  their  use.  But  there  can  be  neither  peace  nor 
progress  until  the  laws  governing  the  appropriation  and  control  of  water  and  the 
use  of  the  public  domain  shall  have  been  revised  and  enlarged  so  as  to  meet  the 
peculiar  needs  of  the  situation.  When  this  has  been  accomplished  real  progress  will 
begin,  and  never  cease  until  this  valley  and  the  rich  natural  resources  surrounding  it 
shall  be  fully  developed.  Then  a  region  which  is  now  mostly  a  wilderness  will  be 
crowded  with  the  homes  of  men,  and  the  semibarbarism  of  the  frontier  will  have 
given  place  to  a  real  civilization. 

23856— No.  100—01 8 


FEATURES  AND  WATER  RIGHTS  OF  YUBA  RIVER,  CALIFORNIA.  ' 

By  MARSDEN  MANSON,  C.  E.,  Ph.  D. 
WATERSHED  OF  YUBA  RIVEE. 

Yuba  River  is  a  tributary  of  Feather  River,  entering  this  latter  stream  at  Marys- 
ville,  30  miles  above  its  mouth  (PL  VIII).  The  Yuba  drains  about  1,357  square  miles 
of  the  western  slope  of  the  Sierra  Nevada,  comprising  portions  of  Sierra,  Nevada, 
Plumas,  and  Yuba  counties.  The  extreme  length  of  the  watershed  is  about  60  miles 
and  the  extreme  width  36  miles;  in  addition  to  this  length  are  about  11  miles  of 
channel  in  the  valley  between  the  foothills  and  Feather  River.  In  size  Yuba  River 
is  fourth  in  the  Sadramento  Valley.  Its  extreme  low-water  discharge  is  about  360 
cubic  feet  per  second;1  mean  water  discharge  1,500,  and  flood  discharge  26,000  cubic 
feet  per  second.2  The  river  for  the  lower  10  miles  of  its  course  in  the  foothills  is 
tilled  up  with  hydraulic  mining  debris  estimated  at  many  millions  of  cubic  yards,  and 
is  between  levees  which  have  been  raised  from  year  to  year  to  meet  the  filling  up  of 
the  area  between  them.  The  channel  in  the  lower  foothills  has  been  filled  more  than 
100  feet  deep  with  cobbles  and  gravel.  The  channel  of  the  river  from  the  foothills 
to  the  mouth,  at  Marysville,  lies  over  a  surface  recently  built  up  of  gravel,  sand,  and 
clay  from  the  mines  above.  The  channels  are  irregular  and  change  from  winter  to 
winter,  and  sometimes  during  the  summer. 

It  is  therefore  impracticable  to  establish  low-water  gaging  stations  which  would 
serve  for  more  than  one  summer  and  fall,  and  which  would  be  suitable  for  winter  or 
flood-stage  gagings.  The  changes  in  the  bottom  and  in  the  positions  of  the  channel 
are  so  great  that  gagings  at  the  flood  stages  of  the  river  would  be  unsatisfactory, 
and,  if  undertaken  from  boats,  highly  dangerous,  if  not  impossible. 

Its  drainage  basin  is  subdivided  into  five  smaller  ones,  namely :  The  North  Fork, 
with  a  drainage  area  of  491.6  square  miles;  the  Middle  Fork,  with  a  drainage  area  of 
218  square  miles;  the  South  Fork,  with  a  drainage  area  of  360  square  miles;  Deer 
Creek,  with  a  drainage  area  of  89.6  square  miles;  and  Dry  Creek,  with  a  drainage 
area  of  105.5  square  miles.  In  addition  to  these  areas,  92.5  square  miles  drain  into 
the  main  stream  above  the  100-foot  contour. 

Dry  Creek  joins  the  river  from  the  north  just  as  it  leaves  the  foothills,  the 
others  having  united  in  the  mountains.  The  forks  are  perennial  in  flow,  but  the 
discharge  of  the  two  creeks  named  becomes  insignificant  in  the  late  summer  and  early 
autumn. 

1  This  is  not  as  small  as  the  natural  discharge  would  be.     The  large  mining  companies,  North 
Bloomfield,  Milton,  Eureka  Lake,  the  South  Yuba  Water  Company,  and  other  companies  store  quite 
large  volumes  of  water  during  the  winter  and  spring  months,  the  use  of  which  during  periods  of  low 
water  forms  a  considerable  portion  of  late  summer  and  early  autumn  discharge. 

2  Extreme  flood  discharge  estimated  by  Mr.  Hubert  Vischer,  assistant  engineer,  United  States 
Engineer  Corps,  at  125,000  cubic  feet  per  second.     House  Doc.  No.  431,  56th  Cong.,  1st  sess.,  p.  12. 

115 


116  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  Sierra  foothills  as  they  merge  into  the  valley  have  an  elevation  of  about  100 
feet  above  tide.  The  watershed  rises  gently  in  rounded  and  broken  mountains  to  the 
crest  of  the  Sierras,  which  at  the  headwaters  of  the  Yuba  has  a  mean  elevation  of 
about  8,200  feet,  with  peaks  rising  to  9.100  feet.  From  Mount  Lincoln,  a  point 
common  to  the  watersheds  of  Yuba,  American,  and  Truckee  rivers,  to  some  2%  miles 
northeast  of  Mount  Webber,  the  summit  of  the  Sierras  divides  the  watershed  of 
Yuba  River  from  that  of  Truckee  River,  which  discharges  into  Humboldt  Basin. 
Farther  on  beyond  Mount  Webber  there  is  a  secondary  crest  which  divides  the 
watersheds  of  Yuba  and  Feather  rivers,  the  watershed  of  the  latter  stream  reaching 
farther  east  to  a  less  elevated  divide,  in  which  the  passes  are  lower  than  those  in  the 

easterly  crest. 

PHYSICAL   FEATURES   AND   GEOLOGY. 

The  western  and  lower  portions  of  the  drainage  area  are  slates  and  kindred  rock, 
very  much  eroded  and  merging  into  gravel  and  alluvial  deposits  of  the  great  valley 
of  California.  The  upper  portions  are  principally  lava  and  granites.  All  are  deeply 
eroded,  particularly  the  slates  and  lavas.  Some  idea  of  the  -magnitude  of  these 
erosions  is  gained  when  it  is  considered  that  the  great  valley  of  California  has 
required  at  least  4,000,  and  possibly  6,000,  cubic  miles  of  denuded  materials  to  fill  it 
to  its  present  level,  most  of  which  Jias  come  from  the  Sierras. 

A  stratum  of  serpentine  traverses  the  watershed  of  Yuba  River  in  a  direction 
generally  parallel  with  the  crest  of  the  Sierras.  It  is  intersected  by  the  North  Fork 
at  Goodycars  Bar,  by  the  Middle  Fork  near  Moores  Flat,  and  by  the  South  Fork  just 
east  of  Washington,  and  leaves  the  drainage  basin  of  Yuba  River  and  passes  near 
Towles  station,  on  the  Central  Pacific  Railroad. 

This  stratum  is  generally  softer  and  more  easily  eroded  than  adjoining  strata. 
The  canyons  of  the  various  forks  are  therefore  upon  lighter  grades  through  it  than 
immediately  above  and  below,  and  the  canyons  are  generally  wider.  This  softer 
material  also  controls  the  loci  of  longer  and  more  deeply  eroded  tributaries,  which 
afford  approaches  to  the  main  canyons  for  roads  and  trails. 

This  stratum  is  of  further  interest  sines  it  is  the  dividing  line  between  the 
aui'iferous  strata  in  the  watershed.  To  the  west  of  it  the  mines  are  more  extensive 
and  more  reliable,  the  occurrences  of  gold-bearing  rock  to  the  east  being  irregular 
and  difficult  to  trace. 

The  topographic;  features  of  the  drainage  basin  of  Yuba  River  and  those  of 
adjacent  basins  can  not  be  understood  without  a  brief  outline  of  certain  occurrences 
in  the  geological  history  of  the  region. 

The  Sierras  as  a  mountain  range  antedate  Tertiary  time.  The  drainage  lines 
and  features  of  much  of  the  early  topography  north  of  the  Tuolumne  River  were 
blotted  out  during  the  Tertiary  era  by  an  overflow  of  lava,  basaltic  in  some  instances, 
but  principally  mud  lava  in  vast  sheets,  carrying  bowlders  of  all  sizes  and  shapes, 
cobbles,  and  gravel.  The  features  established  by  this  overflow  can  now  be  traced 
only  partially,  as  far  into  and  through  these  sheets  Glacial  and  recent  erosions  have 
carved  a  new  set  of  channels  and  established  a  new  set  of  topographic  features. 
Upon  the  disappearance  of  the  Glacial  period  modern  rivers  carved  out  new  channels 
upon  lower  lines  than  the  early  rivers  and  intersecting  these  latter  at  variable  angles. 
Being  lower,  they  have  afforded  the  outfall  for  the  hydraulic  mining  operations 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Of':e  of  Expt.  S-  . 


THE  DRAINAGE  BASIN  OF  THE  TUBA  RIVER 

TOGKTHER  WITH 

CANALS  DIVERTING  WATER  THEREFROA 
CALIFORNIA. 


NOTE" -77if  depth  of  mean  aniuial  rainfall 
is  shown  on.  the  dotted  tsofn-eiose  lines. 
The  boundary  of  the  drainage  basin  of        / 
the  main,  river  ajuL  of  each,  tributary 
tfiereof  is  given,  in  order  to  show  1w\v 
canals  are  corned  from  one  basin  to  a 

/• 


\  '•    '    ,' 

'•  surrl 


Plate 


MOST  NORTHERN 

PORTION  OF  DRAINAGE 

BASIN 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  117 

conducted  in  tho  deposits  loft,  in  the  bods  of  the  earlier  streams.  Some  of  the 
materials  left  in  the  early  channels  were1  also  subjected  to  Glacial  erosion  and  trans- 
portation. These  processes  doubly  concentrated  the  gold  in  the  original  strata  and 
made  lines  of  Glacial  How  and  modern  streams  particularly  rich  just  below  their 
intersections  with  the,  early  rivers. 

There  have  been,  therefore,  throe  sots  of  topographical  features: 

First,  the  earlier  topography,  established  by  the  upheaval  and  partial  denudation 
of  the  range. 

Second,  that  established  by  the  lava  outburst  and  succeeding  erosion. 

Third,  that  produced  by  Glacial  and  post-Glacial  erosion,  which  is  cross  carved 
and  cut  into  the  preceding  systems.  In  some  instances  one  of  these  systems  remains 
intact,  in  others  two  appear,  whilst  in  rare  instances  remnants  of  the  earlier  systems 
make  up  parts  of  the  features  now  found. 

The  combinations  of  these  topographical  types  are  found  at  the  head  of  Bear 
River.  This  river  heads  17  miles  west  of  the  summit  of  the  Sierras,  the  headwaters 
of  the  North  Fork  of  American  River  and  those  of  the  South  Fork  of  Yuba  River 
reaching  beyond  those  of  Hear  River  to  the  summit  of  Mount  Lincoln. 

The  upper  one-third  of  the  drainage  basin  of  the  South  Yuba  was  the  gathering 
ground  for  a  glacier.  This  glacier,  instead  of  following  the  channel  of  that  river 
through  thojtortuous,  deep,  and  narrow  channel  which  turns  northwest  through  110 
degrees,  plowed  its  way  in  a  direct  course  through  the  lava  ridge  and  eroded  Bear 
Valley,  in  which  Bear  River  heads. 

Upon  the  disappearance  of  the  ice  age,  Yuba  River  took  the  northerly  course 
along  a  deeply  eroded  channel,  leaving  a  portion  of  its  Glacial  channel  below  this 
bend  for  Bear  River.  This  river  therefore  occupies  a  channel  far  larger  than  its 
feeble  forces  could  have  excavated.  The  topography  in  this  region  consists  of  three 
types.  Yuba  River  below  the  bend  probably  occupies  a  very  old  channel.  The 
remnants  of  the  mud-lava  overflow  form  the  ridges  on  either  side  of  the  Glacial  gap 
at  the  head  of  Bear  River,  whilst  this  gap  and  the  headwaters  of  the  South  Yuba 
were  shaped  by  Glacial  action. 

The  glacial  gap  eroded  through  the  lava  ridge  is  only  a  few  hundred  feet  above 
the  present  bed  of  the  canyon  of  the  South  Fork,  and  affords  an  easy  line  for  the 
diversion  of  its  waters  into  the  basin  of  Bear  River,  down  both  sides  of  which  are 
important  ditches. 

The  middle  and  upper  portions  of  the  watersheds  of  the  three  forks  are  materially 
different.  The  North  Fork  rises  in  lavas  which  vary  much  in  composition  and  hard- 
ness, but  which  generally  afford  a  deep  soil  for  timber  and  shrub  growth.  The 
Middle  Fork  rises  in  similar  lavas  and  in  granite.  The  mean  elevation  of  the  crest 
of  the  Sierras  at  the  head  of  these  forks  is  about  8,200  feet.  The  main  and  tributary 
streams  fall  rapidly,  and  their  canyons  head  well  up  into  the  mountains.  The  sides 
of  these  canyons  are  covered  with  timber  and  brush,  which,  with  the  deep  soil,  retain 
the  moisture  for  numerous  perennial  springs.  This  is  particularly  the  case  with  the 
North  Fork,  making  it  a  reliable  and  constant  stream.  The  mean  annual  precipita- 
tion upon  these  watersheds  is  about  5i  inches  of  snow  and  rain.  Warm  rains  on  soft 
snow  sometimes  give  a  high  flood  run  off,  but  snow  remains  on  the  higher  peaks 
until  midsummer.  Reservoir  areas  are  not  numerous,  and  will  be  mentioned  later. 


118  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  headwaters  of  the  South  Fork  lie  upon  a  broad  granite  surface,  into  which 
the  streams  have  not  cut  deeply  until  the  main  stream  reaches  a  point  16  miles  from 
the  summit,  where  it  drops  rapidly  into  a  deeply  eroded  canyon.  The  eastern  or 
upper  edge  of  the  drainage  area  has  a  mean  elevation  of  about  the  same  as  the  other 
forks,  but  the  5,000  feet  contour  is  about  20  miles  to  the  westward.  This  broad  sur- 
face has  been  denuded  by  glacial  action,  and  the  harder  nature  of  the  granite  has  not 
permitted  a  deep  soil  to  form.  The  area,  therefore,  is  less  heavily  timbered  than  the 
drainage  areas  of  the  other  two  forks,  and  its  accessibility  has  caused  it  to  suffer 
more  severehr  from  the  ax  of  the  lumberman. 

This  topography  gives  a  broader  and  more  gently  sloping  surface  than  character- 
izes the  headwaters  of  other  Sierra  streams.  This  surface  is  marked  by  nearly  one 
hundred  glacial  lakelets  and  valleys,  affording  many  excellent  reservoirs  which  have 
been  or  are  being  utilized.  This  elevated  watershed  receives  a  mean  annual  precipi- 
tation of  60  inches,  most  of  which  is  in  the  form  of  snow,  the  slow  melting  of  which 
maintains  the  discharge  of  tributaries  until  June  or  July.  This  feature  and  the 
development  of  storage  make  the  South  Fork  of  the  Yuba  River  a  highly  valuable  and 
reliable  source  of  water  supply. 

NATURE,  ORIGIN,  AND  ACQUISITION   OF  WATER  RIGHTS  IN   THE  BASIN  OF 

YUBA  RIVER. 

Water  being  a  necessity  in  all  forms  of  mining  operations,  the  right  to  take  and 
use  it  was  recognized  in  the  earliest  stages  of  mining  operations  in  1849. 

At  that  time  all  lands,  except  those  held  under  the  Spanish  and  Mexican  grants, 
were  part  of  the  public  domain,  and  riparian  rights  were  bounded  by  the  summits  of 
the  ridges  which  divided  and  subdivided  the  various  watersheds.  The  grants  had 
been  made  under  the  laws  of  Mexico  and  Spain,  which  laws  did  not  contain  nor  rec- 
ognize the  riparian  rights  of  English  common  law.  The  United  States  in  the  treaty 
of  Guadalupe- Hidalgo  undertook  to  guarantee  and  to  protect  the  owners  of  these 
lands  in  the  rights  which  they  had  acquired  and  enjoyed,  but  it  did  not  endow  these 
lands  with  rights  they  did  not  have.  The  riparian  rights  attachable  to  the  public 
domain  (if  such  rights  were  attachable)  had  the  limits  above  set  forth. 

Upon  the  discovery  of  gold  in  1848  great  numbers  of  miners  settled  upon  the 
public  domain,  and  finding  no  laws  by  which  they  could  acquire  either  the  mines  or 
the  water  with  which  to  operate  them,  proceeded  to  establish  equitable  regulations  to 
supply  the  deficiency.  In  September,  1850,  the  State  of  California  was  admitted  into 
the  Union,  and  its  legislature  found  in  existence  and  application  the  customs,  usages, 
and  regulations  of  the  miners,  and  these  customs,  usages,  and  regulations  established 
in  the  various  camps  were  the  beginnings  in  the  United  States  of  the  right  to  divert 
and  use  water.  This  right  was  first  recognized  by  legislative  action  in  April,  1851, 

as  follows: 

Proof  respecting  mining  claims. 

In  actions  respecting  mining  claims,  proof  shall  be  admitted  of  the  customs,  usages,  or  regulations 
established  and  in  force  at  the  bar  or  diggings,  embracing  such  claims;  and  such  customs,  usages,  or 
regulations,  when  not  in  conflict  with  the  constitution  and  laws  of  this  State,  shall  govern  the  decision 
of  the  action.  (Stats.  Cal.,  1851,  p.  149.) 

These  customs,  usages,  and  regulations  were  in  various  forms,  but  one  essential 
and  fundamental  principle  was  embodied  in  all,  namely,  the  right  to  appropriate, 


FEATURES  AND  WATER  RIGHTS  OF  YUBA  RIVER.  119 

divert,  and  use  water.  Possible  conflicts  in  the  application  of  this  right  were  guarded 
t>y  clauses  providing  that  priority  of  claim  and  diligent  prosecution  of  work  were 
essential.  Abuses  were  guarded  against  by  clauses  which  required  a  claimant  to  make 
good  his  claim  by  actual  use,  and  limiting  his  claim  to  the  volume  of  water  actually 
used.  Abandonment  was  recognized  as  a  forfeiture.  Thus  by  nonuser  extravagant 
claims  to  water  were  held  in  check  in  whole  or  in  part. 

Under  these  principles  there  were  laid  out  and  constructed  extensive  water  stor- 
ing and  diverting  works.  The  necessity  for  large  volumes  of  water  at  points  remote 
from  streams  was  so  great  that  water  from  one  drainage  basin  was  diverted  into  or 
carried  across  an  adjacent  basin.  The  claim  to  water  for  mining  purposes  grew  into 
a  claim  to  water  alone,  and  individuals  and  corporations  undertook  to  appropriate, 
store,  and  supply  water,  not  only  for  tneir  own  properties,  but  for  others.  The 
riparian  right  was  thus  practically  set  aside,  and  the  prime  necessity  for  water  for 
mining  gave  full  sanction  to  this  action. 

This  harmonized  with  the  law  and  practice  of  water  appropriation  which  had    ^v 
previously  existed  under  Spanish  and  Mexican  rule,  and  which  had  been  handed  down       [_ 
from  Roman  law  through  these  channels.     But  it  was  radically  at  variance  with  the 
riparian-right  principles  which  existed  in  the  common  law  of  England,  and  which  had 
been  embodied  in  the  codes  of  the  several  States. 

These  common-law  principles  came  to  this  country  as  a  "precious  heritage,"  and 
found  proper  and  easy  lodgment  in  the  codes  of  the  Eastern  States,  where  climatic 
conditions  are  about  the  same  as  those  in  England,  and  where  the  mean  annual  rain- 
fall is  from  30  to  50  inches,  and  drainage  more  essential  in  agricultural  operations 
than  irrigation.  But  in  the  arid  and  semiarid  States  and  Territories  the  adoption  of 
these  principles  in  so  far  as  they  affect  water  supply  has  been  done  without  due  con- 
sideration, and  leaves  the  law  with  no  rational  and  philosophic  basis  add  opposed  to 
the  necessities  of  the  country.  These  principles  are  adopted  in  California  as  follows: 

An  act  adopting  the  common  law,  passed  April  17,  1850: 

The  common  law  of  England,  so  far  as  it  is  not  repugnant  to  or  inconsistent  with  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  or  the  constitution  or  laws  of  the  State  of  California,  shall  be  the  rule  of  decision        \ 
in  all  the  courts  of  this  State.     (Stats.  Cal.,  1850,  p.  219.) 

The  statutes  of  1899  contain  the  following: 

SEC.  4468.  The  common  law  of  England,  so  far  as  it  is  not  repugnant  to  or  inconsistent  with  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  or  the  constitution  or  laws  of  this  State,  is  the  rule  of  decision  in  all 
the  courts  of  this  State. 

From  the  above  beginnings  of  the  right  to  appropriate  water  the  laws  of  Cali- 
fornia were  gradually  perfected,  and  they  now  prescribe  the  mode  by  which  the 
waters  flowing  in  a  river  or  stream,  or  down  a  canyon  or  ravine,  may  be  acquired  by 
appropriation. 

These  laws  prescribe  that  the  appropriation  must  be  for  some  useful  or  beneficial 
purpose,  the  rights  to  which  are  voided  by  nonuser.  (Civil  Code  of  California,  sec- 
tions 801,  sub.  5,  and  1410,  1415,  1416,  1417,  1418,  1419,  and  1420.) 

These  provisions  of  the  law  are  reenforced  by  others  which  favor  the  appropria- 
tors  and  users  with  the  right  to  use  natural  channels  as  conduita  and  with  the  right 
to  change  the  place  of  diversion,  provided  no  injury  be  done  thereby. 

Rights  and  properties  acquired  under  these  laws  are  protected  by  penal  laws. 
(See  sections  499  and  592  of  the  Penal  Code  of  California.) 


120  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

On  July  26,  1866,  or  fifteen  years  after  State  recognition  of  this  new  right,  it 
was  embodied  in  the  United  States  Statutes  as  section  2339  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of 
the  United  States,  as  follows: 

Whenever,  by  priority  or  possession,  rights  to  the  use  of  water  for  mining,  agricultural,  manufactur- 
ing, or  other  purposes  have  vested  and  accrued,  and  the  same  are  recognized  and  acknowledged  by  the 
local  customs,  laws,  and  the  decisions  of  the  courts,  the  possessors  and  owners  of  such  vested  rights 
shall  be  maintained  and  protected  in  the  same,  and  the  right  of  way  for  the  construction  of  ditches 
and  canals  for  the  purposes  herein  specified  is  acknowledged  and  confirmed;  and  whenever  any  person 
in  the  construction  of  any  ditch  or  canal  injures  or  damages  the  possession  of  any  settler  on  the  public 
domain,  the  party  committing  such  injury  shall  be  liable  to  the  party  injured  for  such  injury  or 
damage. 

SEC.  2340.  All  patents  granted  or  preemptions  or  homesteads  allowed  shall  be  subject  to  any 
vested  and  accrued  water  rights  or  rights  to  ditches  and  reservoirs  used  in  connection  with  such  water 
rights  as  may  have  been  acquired  under  or  recognized  by  the  preceding  section. 

The  common-law  principles  of  riparian  rights  thus  came  into  conflict  with  the 
practice  and  law  existing  previous  to  the  acquisition  of  the  country;  with  the 
customs,  usages,  and  regulations  established  by  the  miners  upon  the  sound  and 
philosophic  basis  of  necessity,  and  with  the  incorporation  of  these  into  State  laws 
and  into  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the  United  States. 

The  question  of  riparian  rights  came  before  the  supreme  court  of  California,  in 
Lux  v.  Haggin  (69  Cal.,255),  and  the  following  is  the  interpretation  by  a  majority 
of  the  court: 

By  the  common  law  as  administered  in  this  State,  the  right  of  the  riparian  proprietor  to  the  flow 
of  the  stream '  is  inseparably  annexed  to  the  soil,  and  passes  with  it  not  as  an  easement  or  appurtenance 
but  as  part  and  parcel  of  it.  Use  does  not  create  the  right  and  disuse  can  not  destroy  or  suspend  it. 
The  right  in  each  extends  to  the  natural  and  usual  flow  of  all  water  unless  when  the  quantity  has  been 
diminished  as  a  consequence  of  the  reasonable  application  by  other  riparian  owners  for  domestic 
purposes,  for  watering  stock,  and  for  irrigation;  what  is  such  reasonable  use  is  a  question  of  fact  and 
depends  upon  the  circumstances  appearing  in  each  particular  case. 

The  citizens  and  industrial  enterprises  of  this  State  are  thus  in  the  anomalous 
position  of  having  to  operate  under  contradictory  laws.  On  one  side  the  common- 
law  principles  of  riparian  rights  have  been  ingrafted  into  the  code  without  defining 
whether  these  principles  should  apply  to  the  low-water  discharge  of  streams,  to  flood 
discharge,  or  to  some  intermediate  stage.  On  the  other  hand,  the  antagonistic  prin- 
ciple of  appropriation  of  water  has  been  introduced,  and  is  the  basis  of  extensive 
industries,  and  which  permits  the  citizen  to  lay  claim  to  any  amount  of  water  he 
m&y  deem  fit,  limiting  his  legal  rights  to  the  capacity  of  the  works  he  may  construct. 

As  a  result,  upon  nearly  every  stream  in  the  State  has  already  sprung  up  or  will 
spring  up  a  vexatious  series  of  lawsuits.  The  questions  involved  must  be  settled 
upon  the  basis  of  facts  and  testimony  of  each  particular  case,  no  one  type  of  princi- 
ples being  applicable  to  all  cases.  The  matter  can  not,  therefore,  be  settled  by 
legislative  enactment,  although  judicious  laws  will  tend  toward  system  and  wise 
supervision  will  adjust  some  of  the  impending  legal  troubles  and  prevent  future 
conflicts.  But  most  of  the  discrepancies  and  disagreements  must,  in  the  language  of 
the  supreme  court  of  the  State,  be  settled  "  upon  the  circumstances  appearing  in  each 


1  It  would  be  much  better  for  the  State  if  the  court,  instead  of  the  words  "flow  of  the  stream," 
could  have  said,  "the  use  of  the  water  is  inseparably  annexed  to  the  soil." 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    TUBA    KIVEB.  121 

particular  case."  It  may  he  possible  by  legislative  action  or  legal  interpretation  of 
the  existing  laws  to  restrict  the  riparian  right  to  low-water  discharge,  leaving  flood 
waters  for  appropriation  and  storage.  But  the  riparian  right  can  not  be  set  aside  by 
law,  as  it  is  "inseparably  annexed  to  the  soil,  not  as  an  easement  or  appurtenance, 
but  us  part  and  parcel  of  it.  Use  does  not  create  the  right  and  disuse  can  not  destroy 
or  suspend  it.'M 

CLAIMS  FILED  ON  YTTBA  RIVER  AND  ITS  TRIBUTARIES. 

Claims  to  the  waters  of  Yuba  River  and  its  tributaries  are  recorded  in  the  three 
counties  drained  by  that  river — Nevada  County,  at  Nevada  City;  Sierra  County,  at 
Downieville;  Yuba  County,  at  Marysville. 

Nevada  County  claims  are  recorded  in  three  volumes  of  Mining  and  Water 
Claims.  Subsequent  to  1872  there  is  a  separate  volume  of  Water  Claims.  County 
records  prior  to  1856  were  destroyed  by  fire,  and  the  right  to  some  of  the  oldest  and 
most  valuable  properties  rests  upon  prescription  and  evidence.  The  total  number  of 
recorded  claims  is  358. 

Water  rights  in  Sierra  County  are  kept  in  six  volumes  known  as  Volumes  A,  B, 
C,  D,  E,  and  F  of  Bank  and  Water  Claims,  and  subsequent  to  1895  a  seventh  volume, 
Book  G,  Water  Claims. 

The  claims  recorded  aggregate  about  3,000.  The.  attorney  who  examined  this 
matter  reported  that  it  would  take  about  forty  days'  work  to  transcribe  them,  and 
the  transcript  would  be  of  little  value  for  the  following  reasons: 

First.  Since  most  of  the  early  claims  were  taken  up  for  mining  purposes  only, 
and  as  this  water  was  returned  to  the  stream,  it  did  not  really  impair  the  volume  of 
water. 

Second.  The  very  great  majority  of  these  claims  have  long  since  been  abandoned 
and  are  dead. 

Third.  Many  of  these  claims  were  notices  of  intention  only,  and  nothing  was 
done  to  carry  out  the  intention. 

Fourth.  Many  perfectly  valid  water  rights  exist  which  have  not  been  recorded, 
the  rights  having  been  acquired  by  prescription. 

These  claims  were,  therefore,  not  copied.  Those  upon  the  assessor's  list  num- 
ber 90. 

Yuba  County  water  records  are  kept  in  Volumes  I  and  II,  Miscellaneous  Records; 
Volumes  I  and  II,  Prescriptions,  and  Volume  I,  Water  Rights  (since  1872). 

In  these  volumes  are  recorded  329  claims,  many  of  which  are  abandoned.2 

STORAGE  OF  WATER  IN  THE  BASIN  OF  YTJBA  RIVER. 

The  precipitation  upon  the  drainage  basin  of  the  Yuba  River  is  dependent  upon 
the  southerly  or  winter  extension  of  the  north  temperate  rain  belt.  During  the 
summer  months  the  more  northerly  position  of  this  belt  leaves  California  in  the 
comparatively  rainless  region  between  the  north  temperate  and  arid  equatorial  rain 
belts.  The  rains  and  snows,  therefore,  fall  from  October  to  April,  with  little  or  no 

'69  Cal.,  255,  previously  quoted. 

2  An  abstract  of  these  claims  was  furnished  with  this  report.    It  is  too  long  to  be  inserted. 


122 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


rainfall  of  moment  from  May  to  September.  The  streams  during  these  months, 
therefore,  depend  upon  natural  or  artificial  storage.  Natural  storage  is  had  by  snow 
and  by  the  slow  run  off  of  water  retained  in  afforested  and  brush-covered  soils. 
Artificial  storage  has  reached  a  very  efficient  stage  on  the  South  Fork. 

The  mean  distribution  of  precipitation  is  shown  on  the  map  accompanying  this 
report  and  also  on  the  section  which  shows  the  increase  due  to  elevation  (fig.  1).  This 
ranges  from  20  inches  at  Marysville,  in  the  valley,  to  70  inches  at  the  summit  of  the 
Sierras. ' 

Snow  storage  of  water  is  depended  on  during  .the  latter  part  of  April  and  into 
July.  The  run  off  until  June  is  superabundant  for  all  purposes,  but  begins  to  fall 
below  the  necessities  of  dependent  industries  from  July  until  autumnal  rains.  Snow 
storage  has  not  been  made  a  subject  of  extended  observation,  except  by  Mr.  W.  F. 
Englebright,  the  chief  engineer  of  the  South  Yuba  Water  Company,  through  whose 


FIG.  1.— Diagram  showing  variation  in  precipitation  with  altitude. 

courtesy  the  writer  is  enabled  to  present  the  following  instructive  diagram  of  the 
rate  of  accumulation,  depth,  and  rate  of  melting  of  snow  at  Lake  Fordyce  (fig.  2). 
This  lake  has  an  elevation  of  6,500  feet  above  tide  level,  and  is  in  a  region  over 
which  annual  precipitation  in  melted  snow  is  70  inches. 

The  variation  in  depth  of  snow  in  different  seasons  and  the  effect  of  late  cold 
seasons  are  distinctly  shown  on  the  diagram. 

Snow- begins  to  accumulate  late  in  November  and  reaches  its  maximum  depth  of 
packed  snow  in  March.  The  lower  readings  on  the  gage  rod,  following  higher 
readings  during  the  winter  months,  generally  indicate  a  packing  of  the  snow.  Melt- 
ing begins  in  March  and  continues  quite  regularly  until  the  middle  of  June  or  early 
in  July;  short  storms  during  April  and  May  cause  offsets  in  the  curve,  which  resumes 
a  parallel  line.  A  series  of  cold  and  heavy  storms  in  April,  1896,  caused  the  snow 
to  last  until  July  5,  while  the  clear  warm  spring  of  1897  caused  it  to  disappear  on 
the  7th  of  June. 

1  These  figures  and  the  isohyetal  lines  on  the  general  map  are  taken  from  a  map  prepared  under 
the  writer's  direction  for  the  California  Water  and  Forest  Association,  showing  the  drainage  area, 
mean  annual  rainfall,  and  forest  distribution  throughout  the  State. 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER. 


123 


By  moans  of  daily  reports  by  telephone  the,  chief  engineer  of  the  company  is 
enabled  through  diagrams  upon  a  larger  scale,  to  approximate  during  the  latter  half 
of  April  to  within  ;i  few  days  of  the  duration  of  the  snow  suoolv  and  the  beginning 
of  the  draft  on  reservoirs. 

Data  and  studies  of  this  kind  are  highly  valuable  and  suggest  the  importance  of 
stations  above  the  snow  line  as  a  means  of  determining  the  volume  of  snow  storage 
available  in  different  seasons  and  the  ratio  between  the  volumes  stored  by  snow  and 
by  reservoirs.  The  discharge  of  the  .streams  is  maintained  during  the  spring  and 
for  one-half  the  summer  months  by  snow,  and  the  measure  and  rate  of  this  discharge 
can  be  reasonably  foretold  by  daily  readings  of  properly  situated  gages. 


DIAGRAM  SHOWING  DEPTH  OF  SNOW  AT  LAKE  FORDYCE. 


Dili  fliruinkxl  I')  W.F.  l:n|lrtri«IL 


FIG.  2.  —  Diagram  showing  dupth  of  snow  at  Lake  Fordyoe. 

ARTIFICIAL,  STORAGE  FACILITIES  ON  YUBA  RIVEB. 

SOUTH    FOUR. 

The  natural  facilities  for  the  storage  of  storm  waters  are  particularly  favorable 
in  the  upper  third  of  the  drainage  basin  of  the  South  Fork.     The  demands  for  large 
volumes  of  water  under  high  pressure  to  operate  mines  in  the  middle  and  lower 
portions  of  its  drainage  basin  and  those  on  Bear  and  American  rivers  were  met  by  ^ 
the  construction  of  large  and  expensive  canals  and  storage  reservoirs. 

Just  above  the  great  bend  north  of  the  head  of  Bear  River  and  at  the  head  of  the 
steep  canyon  of  the  South  Fork,  there  occurs  a  broad  and  flat  glacial  valley  which  has 
been  converted  into  Lake  Spanieling  by  a  stone  dam.  The  lake  has  a  capacity  of 
270,000,000  cubic  feet  and  is  the  lower  and  controlling  reservoir  of  a  series  embrac- 
ing the  available  storage  supply  above.  This  supply  is  derived  from  about  120 


124 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


square  miles  upon  which  the  mean  annual  precipitation  in  rain  and  melted  snow  is 
about  5  feet.     Storage  is  had  in  the  following  reservoirs: 

Smith  Fork  of  Yulia  Kirn-. 


Name  of  rcst-rvoir. 

Kleva- 
tion. 

Area. 

Capacity. 

Cost  of 
flam. 

Feet. 
7,515 

Acres. 
300 

Gallims. 
1,275,000  000 

$75  000 

Stirling                                                            

7,200 

100 

340,  000,  000 

20,000 

White  Rock                        .           

7,000 

80 

225,000,000 

5,000 

Peak  Lakes  (3)                                                                                              

6,900 

150 

1  "75  000  000 

(a) 

6,500 

474 

."i  !>.">0  000  000 

:ioo  ooo 

7,000 

(a) 

85,000  000 

(a) 

Fall  Creek  Lakes  (6) 

7,000 

171 

1  020  000  000 

(«) 

4,846 

215 

2  125  000  000 

50  000 

6,800 

400 

1  938  816  000 

30  000 

4  400 

60 

145  411  ''00 

8  000 

Total                      

1,950 

14  40y  227  200 

4X8  000 

a  Records  lost. 

The  aggregate  area  of  these  reservoirs  is  3.05  square  miles,  which  is  filled  to  an 
average  depth  of  22£  feet,  thus  giving  storage  for  about  12  per  cent  of  the  mean  annual 
precipitation  upon  the  tributary  area,  the  remainder  going  to  waste  and  to  swell  the 
floods  which  devastate  the  valley.  It  is  possible,  by  raising  the  dams  and  enlarging 
the  canals,  to  utilize  another  considerable  fraction.  The  conditions  favoring  the 
conservation  of  water  on  the  upper  one-third  of  the  drainage  basin  of  the  South 
Fork  are  far  more  favorable  than  in  the  lower  two-thirds,  or  than  those  on  the  other 
forks. 

Upon  the  upper  portion  of  Canyon  Creek,  a  tributary  of  the  South  Yuba,  the 
Eureka  Lake  and  Yuba  Canal  Company  and  the  North  Hloomrield  Gravel  and  Mining 
Company  have  a  system  of  storage  reservoirs  as  follows: 

Reservoirs  on  Canyon  Creek. 


Dam. 

Name. 

Area. 

Height. 

Top 
length. 

Cost. 

lion.  (( 

area. 

Capacity. 

Acre*. 
500 

Feet. 
100 

Feet. 

425 

$151,521 

Feet. 
5,450 

Arm. 
12,093 

/  'nliirfcci. 
930  000  OOC 

Hawmill  Flat                       

80.6 

39.2 

fi  7MI 

•>  000  000 

26.2 

10 

6  410 

;}  .(•>;}  xlt; 

48.8 

12.8 

6  690 

23  027  558 

Middle  Lake                                     

11.2 

12 

6  460 

2  395  800 

10.3 

3 

6  510 

1  COO  000 

8.1 

11 

6  590 

2  906  630 

Fall  Creek  

6  690 

20 

5 

246  000 

5  410 

l.i  000  000 

90 

21 

550 

8  000 

6  060 

3  262 

58  000  000 

83.5 

21.8 

150  000  000 

337.3 

68.2 

260 

35,000 

6,480 

3  170 

661  000  000 

Total         .•  

1  849  354  804 

a  Barometric. 


U    S    Dept.  of  Agr..  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations       Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  IX. 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  125 

The  drainage  area  tributary  to  those  reservoirs  is  28.4  square  miles,  which 
receives  a  total  precipitation  (luring  an  average  year  of  4,589,481,600  cubic  feet,  of 
which  1,84!»,354,S04  cubic  feet  is  stored,  or  between  one-third  and  one-half  the  mean 
annual  precipitation. 

MIDDLE   YUBA. 

On  the  Middle  Yuba  there  are  no  reservoirs  storing  water  at  the  present  time. 
The  only  site  of  any  importance  is  the  Ruyard  or  English  Reservoir  which  has  not 
been  in  use  since  June,  1883,  at  which  date  the  dam  failed.  It  has  a  capacity  of 
650,000,000  cubic  feet. 

Weaver  Lake  is  on  the  watershed  of  the  Middle  Yuba,  but  its  catchment  area  is 
not  large  enough  to  till  it,  so  it  is  supplied  from  the  Eureka  Lake  Company's  Ditch 
from  Canyon  Creek,  a  tributary  of  the  South  Yuba,  and  is  included  in  the  previous 
list.  At  Milton  there  is  an  old  reservoir  site  with  an  estimated  capacity  of  28,000,000 
cubic  feet.  The  total  storage  on  the  Middle  Yuba  may  be  considered  678,000,000 
cubic  feet. 

NORTH   YUBA. 

On  the  North  Yuba  there  are  the  following  small  lakes: 

on  North  Yuba  River. 


Acres. 

Upper  Sardine  .................................................................  38 

Lower  Sardine  .................................................................  40 

Young  American  ..............................................................  9 

Volcano  .......................................................................  2J 

Packer  .....................................................................  ....  v7  ••; 

Saxonia  ................................................................  ,--.'.'..  .  .'  '2J 

Deer  .................................................................  £  .......  5 

rppor  Salmon  ........................................................  :  .........  30 

Lower  Salmon  ................................................................  .  50 

Hawley  ......................................................................  ..  11 

Spencer  lakes   (2)  ..............................................................  16 

Sundry  small  lakes  (5  not  named)   ..............................................  27 

Deadmans  .....................................................................  3 

Total  ....................................................................  241 

These  might  be  developed  to  an  aggregate  storage  capacity  of  500,000,000  cubic 
feet. 

Assuming  that  artificial  storage  on  the  North  and  Middle  forks  could  be  devel- 
oped to  a  capacity  equal  to  that  above  Lake  Spaulding  Darn,  there  would  then  be  in 
service  an  area  of  6.8  square  miles  at  an  average  depth  of  26.4  feet,  or  5,692,000,000 
cubic  feet. 

The  mean  annual  precipitation  upon  the  drainage  basin  of  Yuba  River  is  170,- 
829,000,000  cubic  feet.  The  total  ultimate  artificial  storage  is  less  than  3.3  per  cent 
of  this  precipitation  and  could  hardly  be  recognized  in  a  gaging  of  the  total  run  off. 

The  losses  from  the  surfaces  of  reservoirs  from  evaporation  have  been  measured 


126 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


at  Lake   Fordyce.     This   may  be  considered   typical   for  all   the   reservoirs.     The 
measurements  were  as  follows: 

JSvaportition  at  iMke  Vurdyce. 
[Furnished  by  Mr.  W.  F.  Englebright,  chief  engineer  South  Yuba  Water  Company.     Klevalimi.  t't.SOU  feet.] 


Date. 

Tempera- 
ture. 

Kvapora- 
tion. 

Date. 

Temjiera- 
ture. 

Evapora- 
tion. 

Aug  10  1900                           

0  F. 
64 

Inches. 

A 

Aug.  22,  1900  

°f. 

68 

Inches. 
A 

Aug  11  1900 

65 

A 

Aug.  23,  1900  

65 

Aug  12  1900 

65 

A 

Aug.24,1900  

67 

Aug  13  1900                  

64 

A 

Aug.  25,  1900  

72 

Aug  14  1900 

65 

A 

Aug.  26,  1900 

72 

Aug  15  1900 

64 

ff 

Aug.  27,  1900  

55 

i 

Aug  16  1900                  .                     

64 

A 

Aug.  28,  1900  

60 

i 

Aug  17  1900           

63 

i 

Aug.  29,  1900  

60 

| 

Aug  18  1900 

62 

| 

Aug.  30,  190U 

61 

ft 

Aug  19  1900 

64 

A 

Aug.  31,  1900  

64 

Aug.  20,  1900  

64 

i 

T   tfll  f  r  'f>  1 

Aug  21  1900           

60 

i 



Average,  one-sixth  of  an  inch  per  day,  and  would  probably  average  this  for 
one  hundred  and  twenty  days  each  year,  or  20  inches. 

>  In  the  storage  of  water  for  industrial  purposes  the  uncertainty  of  the  character 
of  the  seasonal  rainfall  makes  it  prudent  and  desirable  to  permit  the  reservoirs  to 
fill  during  the  earlier  rains,  and  not  leave  the  possibility  of  husbanding  a  supply 
to  the  uncertainty  of  succeeding  rains.  Hence  it  generally  happens  that  when 
the  heavy  storms  of  the  late  winter  and  spring  months  occur  these  storms  mid  the 
reservoirs  full  and  the  flood  wave  passes  down  without  being  diminished  by  the 
capacities  of  the  reservoirs.  This  is  true  to  a  limited  extent  of  reservoirs  above 
the  snow  line,  for  in  these  cases  the  snow  constitutes  a  reservoir  of  far  greater 
capacity  than  is  ordinarily  obtained  behind  dams.  It  also  happens  that  in  late  warm 
rains  or  rapid  melting  of  snows  that  reservoirs  are  already  full,  and  that  the 
reservoir  capacity  does  not  diminish  the  flood  volumes. 

It  would  appear,  therefore,  that  however  useful  artificial  reservoirs  are  fof 
domestic  and  industrial  purposes  they  can  not  be  relied  upon,  except  under  excep- 
tional circumstances,  to  decrease  the  height  of  late  winter  and  spring  floods. 

FOREST  STORAGE. 

On  the  South  Fork  of  the  North  Fork  we  have  a  watershed  area  of  139  square 
miles  which  was  gaged  on  September  19,  1900,  after  three  successive  seasons  of 
deficient  rainfall,  and  gave  a  minimum  run  off  of  113  cubic  feet  per  second,  or  0.8 
cubic  foot  per  second  per  square  mile.  This  area  is  well  covered  with  timber  and 
brush,  and  in  one  hundred  and  twenty  days  gives  a  minimum  run  off  of  1,141,152,000 
cubic  feet.  The  drainage  basin  of  the  North  Fork  is  more  heavily  timbered  than  the 
basin  of  the  other  forks,  and  consequently  has  a  deeper  soil,  and  although  only  one- 
tenth  the  total  drainage  area  it  furnishes  75  per  cent  of  the  low-water  flow  of  the 
entire  drainage  basin  above  Parks  Bar. 


FEATURES    AND    WATKR    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER. 


127 


On  the  South  Fork,  above  Lake  Spaulding,  there  is  a  watershed  of  120  square 
miles  which  has  heretofore  been  described  as  comparatively  hare  of  timber,  and  the 
timbered  areas  which  once  existed  have  been  cut  off.  The  run  off  of  this  area  is 
practically  nothing  for  one  hundred  and  twenty  days  each  year,  due  to  this  absence 
of  forests  and  brush.  If  this  area  were  afforested  and  gave  a  minimum  run  off  of 
0.8  cubic  foot  per  second  per  square  mile,  the  discharge  would  be  100  cubic  feet  per 
second,  or  equivalent  to  1,036,800,000  cubic  feet  effective  storage  capacity,  a 
discharge  more  than  equivalent  to  one-half  the  storage  capacities  of  all  the 
reservoirs  above  Lake  Spaulding  Dam.  These  aggregate  1,875,000,000  cubic  feet, 
and  the,  low-water  discharge  of  100  cubic  feet  per  second  for  one  hundred  and  twenty 
days  is  equivalent  to  a  storage  capacity  of  1,036,000,000  cubic  feet.  As  the  basis  of 
the  above  estimate  is  the  extreme  low-water  discharge,  it  is  safe  to  assume  that  by 
afforesting  the  watershed  this  costly  and  extensive  system  of  reservoirs  might  be 
safely  drawn  upon  for  double  their  present  capacity.  When  this  reasoning  is  applied 
to  the  entire  1,357  square  miles,  instead  of  to  small  fractions  thereof,  the  force  of  the 
argument  becomes  more  apparent. 

It  would  appear  from  the  foregoing  that  the  solution  of  the  problem  of  storage 
of  flood  waters  is  not  in  the  retention  of  a  small  percentage  of  the  storm  waters 
behind  dams,  but  in  applying  storage  over  the  entire  watershed  by  the  systematic 
protection  and  extension  of  forest  and  brush  covered  areas. 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  POWER  ON  YtTBA  RIVER. 

Nearly  all  the  ditches  and  reservoirs  in  the  basin  of  Yuba  River  were  constructed 
to  furnish  water  for  mining  purposes.  Upon  the  rendering  of  the  judgments  in  the 


2O  3O 

MILES    FROM    PARKS    BAR    BRIDGE 


FIG.  3.— Diagram  showing  successive  use  of  the  water  of  Yuba  River. 

cases  of  Woodruff  v.  the  North  Bloomfield  Mining  Company  (18  Fed.,  753)  and  the 
United  States  v.  North  Bloomfield  Mining  Company,  circuit  court  of  appeals 
(81  Fed.,  243),  hydraulic  mining  was  suspended.  It  has  been  partially  resumed  under 
the  "Camanetti  act,"  passed  March  1,  1893,  which  prescribes  that  where  approved 
storage  of  detritus  can  be  secured  the  operations  may  proceed  under  a  permit  granted 
by  a  commission  composed  of  officers  of  the  Corps  of  Engineers,  U.  S.  A.,  and 
revocable  by  said  commission  should  the  restraining  works  prove  inefficient. 

These  restrictions  have  left  a  large  surplus  of  water  for  which  use  has  been 


128  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

sought  in  the  development  of  electric  power.  There  is  at  present  more  power 
N/  developed  in  the  Yuba  River  Basin  than  upon  any  other  river  in  California.  Some 
idea  may  be  obtained  of  the  magnitude  of  these  works  when  it  is  understood  that 
there  are  about  1,000  miles  of  ditches  which  cost,  including  reservoirs  and  dams,  at 
least  $6,500,000,  in  addition  to  which  are  the  power  stations,  lines,  etc.,  mentioned 
elsewhere  in  this  report.  An  interesting  feature  in  the  development  of  water  is  its 
successive  use.  A  diagram  (tig.  3)  is  herewith  presented  which  shows  in  general 
the  mode.  Water  from  Lake  Spaulding  and  Lake  Bowman  systems  is  first  used 
for  mining;  it  is  then  picked  up  by  the  Nevada  division  of  the  Bay  Counties  Power 
Company  and  used  for  power,  and  immediately  falls  into  the  head  of  the  Excelsior 
Ditch  and  is  used  for  mining  and  irrigation  at  and  below  Smartsville,  falling  in  this 
distance  from  4,846  feet  at  Lake  Spaulding  or  5,450  feet  at  Lake  Bowman  to  '200 
feet  above  tide  around  Smartsville. 

In  the  diversion  of  water  into  and  from  its  own  drainage  basin  Yuba  River 
presents  both  cases.  Water  from  the  South  Fork  of  Feather  River  is  diverted 
across  the  divide  between  it  and  Yuba  River  at  Woodville,  at  an  elevation  of  3,200 
feet  above  tide,  and  is  used  in  and  around  Challenge  and  l>y  the  Consolidated  York 
Mining  Company.  Yuba  River  water  from  the  South  Yuba  Water  Company's 
system  is  diverted  into  the  basin  of  Bear  River,  thence  into  the  basin  of  American 
River,  and  some,  via  the  New  Blue  Point  Mining  Company's  Ditch,  back  into  the 
basin  of  Yuba  River. 

OPINIONS  UPON  POINTS  SUBMITTED  IN  CIRCULAR  LETTER. 

The  conditions  and  circumstances  attending  the  establishment  of  water  rights  in 
Yuba  River  Basin  vary  materially  from  those  connected  with  the  water  rights 
acquired  later  for  irrigation.  Hence  the  same  adjudications  can  not  be  applied  to 
both. 

In  the  circular  of  instructions  sent  to  those  in  charge  of  the  investigation  reported 
in  this  bulletin  there  were  several  heads  under  which  it  was  desired  that  they  should 
express  an  opinion.  The  opinions  expressed  below  by  the  writer  on  seven  of  these 
points  are  not  in  all  cases  specifically  applicable  to  Yuba  River,  but  are  based  upon 
a  general  acquaintance  with  the  conditions  throughout  the  State. 

(1)  The  foundation  of  any  system  of  administrative  laws  is  the  method  of  establishing  rights  to 
the  stream.     In  your  discussion  of  the  results  in  California  the  first  question  to  be  considered  is 
whether  or  not  the  present  method  of  filing  and  recording  claims  to  water  is  satisfactory.     If  not,  what 
should  take  its  place? 

The  present  method  of  recording  claims  is  not  satisfactory,  as  the  record  can  be 
made  part  of  a  claim  to  that  which  does  not  exist,  namely,  a  surplus  of  water,  laying 
the  basis  in  some  instances  for  vexatious  suits  at  law. 

The  existence  of  a  surplus  of  water  should  be  determined  by  some  competent 
State  authority  and  the  claim  should  be  recorded  in  both  the  county  and  a  central 
State  office. 

(2)  Is  the  present  method  of  adjudicating  rights  satisfactory?    If  not,  what  should  replace  it? 

The  present  method  of  adjudicating  rights  is  not  satisfactory.  The  laws  are 
contradictory,  and  have  been  evolved  on  opposing  lines,  and  rest  on  no  rational  nor 


FEATURES    AND    WATEK    KIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  129 

philosophical  basis.  A  better  system  must  be  the  product  of  gradual  corrections  of 
existing  evils  and  the  prevention  of  future  conflict  by  the  introduction  of  system 
and  control. 

(3)  What  has  been  the  influence  of  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  on  the  success  of  irrigation, 
and  what  modifications  of  this  doctrine  are  suggested? 

Riparian  rights  have  prevented  and  retarded  irrigation  development.  When 
riparian  rights  were  adopted  with  the  common  law  irrigation  was  not  considered.  If 
possible,  the  riparian  right  should  be  restricted  to  low-water  discharge  of  streams, 
and  this  discharge  determined  by  proper  authority.  Storm,  or  extra  seasonal  waters, 
should  be  subject  to  appropriation  and  storage,  or  all  excess  over  low-water  discharge 
be  subject  to  appropriation  for  domestic  or  industrial  use. 

(4)  Is  the  present  system  of  stream  control,  or  lack  of  it,  and  of  dividing  water  between  the 
different  ditcher  which  divert  the  common  supply  satisfactory?     If  not,  what  form  of  administration 
or  control  should  take  its  place? 

All  waters  in  excess  of  low-water  discharge  should  be  declared  the  property  of 
the  State  and  made  subject  to  appropriation  under  State  control  and  supervision. 
Streams  should  be  gaged  and  the  volume  of  low-water  discharge  determined. 
Existing  rights  should  then  be  determined  and  adjudicated,  and  future  appropria- 
tions regulated  according  to  the  supply  available. 

(5)  Should  there  be  a  State  engineer,  and  what  should  be  his  duties? 

This  State  has  had  an  unfortunate  experience  in  this  matter.  A  broad  and 
general  law  was  drawn  in  1878,  which,  by  reason  of  antagonistic  rights  and  unfortu- 
nate attempts  to  execute  certain  public  works,  grew  into  general  disrepute.  .  No 
State  in  the  Union  can  be  more  benefited  than  California  by  a  wise  and  unselfish 
administration  and  control  of  its  water  supply.  An  attempt  to  re-create  the  office  of 
State  engineer  would  be  strongly  opposed.  There  should  be  a  department  of  public 
works,  at  the  head  of  which  should  be  three  competent  and  experienced  civil  engineers 
of  high  standing. 

This  department  should  consolidate  the  work  of  river  and  swamp-land  improve- 
ments, drainage  and  irrigation,  highways  and  public  buildings;  and,  upon  a  proper 
basis,  would  save  expenditures  now  made  upon  these  lines.  The  first  members  should 
be  appointed  for  one,  two,  and  four  years,  respectively,  and  thereafter  for  four 
years. 

There  has  been  expended  over  $20,000,000  on  river  improvement  and  swamp- 
land protection,  much  of  which  has  been  expended  without  system  and  without 
engineering  supervision.  Hence,  no  adequate  returns  have  been  had. 

The  outstanding  bonded  indebtedness  of  irrigation  districts  is  over  $16,000,000. 
The  returns  are  far  from  being  satisfactory.  The  annual  expenditures  upon  highways 
are  about  $2,000,000,  most  of  which  is  injudiciously  and  wastefully  expended.  The 
expenditures  of  these  vast  sums  would  have  been  more  remunerative  if  systematically 
directed  by  a  properly  constituted  department  of  public  works. 

The  expenditures  mentioned  above,  which  aggregate  $38,000,000,*  will  necessarily 

1  Includes  only  one  year's  expenditures  on  highways.  See  Report  Bureau  of  Highways,  1897,  and 
Department  of  Highways,  1899. 

23856— No.  100—01 9 


130  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

be  duplicated  during  coming  years  as  the  interests  extend  and  develop.  The  question 
now  confronting  this  State  is,  Shall  these  expenditures  be  directed  along  well- 
considered  and  systematic  lines,  or  shall  they  be  expended  as  in  the  past  and  be  as 
productive  of  inadequate  results,  delays,  and  litigation  '*. 

(6)  Should  there  be  a  central  office  of  record  of  claims  or  titles  to  water  in  place  of  the  present 
separate  county  records,  and  what  supervision  or  control  should  be  exercised  over  rights  to  be  acquired 
hereafter. 

This  question  is  answered  with  the  first. 

(7)  What  steps  should  be  taken  to  secure  the  fullest  conservation  and  use  of  water  which  now 
runs  to  waste?    The  discussion  of  this  question  to  include  State  or  national  control  and  aid,  the 
legislation  needed  to  define  rights  to  stored  water,  and  to  determine  who  is  entitled  to  the  water  thus 
stored. 

(1)  The  checking  of  the  rate  of  run  off  by  forest  protection  and  extension  through 
Government,  State,  and  county  aid. 

(2)  The  withdrawal  from  sale  or  settlement  of  all  forest  lands,  or  mountain  hinds 
capable  of  being  afforested,  and  the  sale  of  timber  under  proper  control,  and  the 
devotion  of  the  funds  thus  realized  to  forest  protection  and  extension. 

(3)  The  repeal  of  laws  which  permit  of  the  exchange  of  deforested  lands  for  other 
lands  of  the  public  domain. 

(4)  The  restoration  to  the  public  domain  of  all  forest  lands  the  title  to  which  rests 
on  fraud,  perjury,  or  subornation  of  perjury. 

(5)  The  appropriation  of  a  revolving  fund  of  several  million  dollars,  fractions  of 
which  can  be  used  in  those  States  which  make  an  equal  sum  available  for  the  con- 
struction of  storage  reservoirs.     The  waters  of  and  rights  to  these  reservoirs  to  be 
sold  to  land  owners  or  cities  and  towns,  and  this  fund  returned  to  the  revolving  fund 
for  the  construction  of  other  reservoirs  in  the  same  State.     The  construction  and 
disposal  to  be  under  joint  Government  and  State  control. 


APPENDIX. 

THE  USE  OF  THE  WATER  OF  YTTBA  RIVER. 
By  H.  D.  H.  CONNICK. 

The  irrigated  lands  in  the  Yuba  River  drainage  basin  are  principally  in  the 
Browns  Valley  irrigation  district  and  near  Smartsville.  Irrigation  elsewhere  is 
confined  to  small  gardens  and  orchards  of  a  few  acres  in  and  adjacent  to  the  villages, 
such  as  Sierraville,  Downieville,  Cainptonville,  North  San  Juan,  Woodville,  Granite- 
ville,  North  Bloomfield,  Washington,  French  Corral,  Columbia  Hill,  Cherokee, 
Sweetland,  Birchville,  etc.  Operations  here  are,  however,  insignificant  when  com- 
pared with  the  irrigation  practiced  with  water  from  Yuba  River  in  the  drainage 
basin  of  Bear  and  American  rivers.  There  by  far  the  greater  portion  of  the  Yuba 
River  water  used  for  irrigation  is  used  in  the  fruit  districts  around  Auburn,  New- 
castle, and  Penryn,  between  Dutch  Flat  and  Roseville. 


U    S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100.  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  X. 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  131 

BROWNS  VALLEY  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT. 

Browns  Valley  irrigation  district  is  located  in  Yuha  County,  Cal.,  in  the  lower 
foothills  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains,  at  an  average  altitude  of  300  feet  above 
the  sea.  It  comprises  about  44,500  acres,  and  was  organized  September  19,  1888, 
under  the  Wright  irrigation  law. 

On  October  27,  1888,  an  election  was  held  for  the  purpose  of  voting  on  an  issue 
of  bonds  to  the  amount  of  $110,000,  which  resulted  in  favor  of  the  bond  issue.  In 
March,  1892,  a  second  election  was  held  to  vote  on  the  question  of  issuing  additional 
bonds  to  the  amount  of  $30,000,  which  was  also  carried.  Both  issues  of  bonds  sold 
for  90  per  cent,  or  a  total  of  $126,000.  On  August  27,  1893,  an  election  was  held  to 
decide  whether  a  special  tax  of  $10,000  was  to  be  levied  on  the  district.  One  hundred 
and  ten  votes  were  cast,  73  being  in  favor  of  the  special  tax. 

In  November,  1899,  construction  was  commenced  on  the  main  ditch  and  the 
principal  branches.  They  were  completed  in  1893,  and  cost  about  $175,000.  The 
main  ditch  is  48  miles  long,  the  first  7  miles  being  flume,  and  2  miles  of  the  balance 
being  short  flumes.  It  takes  its  water-  from  the  North  Fork  about  2.5  miles  above 
the  junction  of  the  North  and  Middle  Yuba.  The  original  crib  dam  was  about  28 
feet  high  and  168  feet  on  the  crest.  This  dam  has  since  been  raised,  it  being  at 
present  37  feet  high  and  168  feet  on  the  crest.  The  water  was  turned  into  a  flume, 
which  carried  it  down  the  north  bank  of  the  river  to  Colgate.  This  flume  was  4  by  5 
feet,  with  a  uniform  grade  of  9.6  feet  per  mile,  and  is  claimed  to  have  had  a  capacity 
of  3,000  miner's  inches.  From  the  end  of  the  flume  the  water  was  carried  to  the 
Campbell  Divide  in  a  ditch  7  feet  on  top,  5  feet  on  the  bottom,  and  3  feet  deep;  grade, 
9.6  feet  to  the  mile,  with  a  capacity  of  3,500  miner's  inches.  From  the  Campbell 
Divide  it  was  carried  to  the  vicinity  of  Browns  Valley  in  a  ditch  7  feet  wide  on  top, 
5  feet  on  the  bottom,  2.5  feet  deep,  upon  the  same  grade.  Besides  this  main  ditch 
there  are  five  principal  branches  which  distribute  water  to  the  different  parts  of  the 
district.  The  capacity  of  the  system  was  limited  to  about  2,200  miner's  inches.  The 
main  ditch  was  gaged  on  the  west  side  of  Dry  Creek  August  15,  1900.  It  contained 
750  miner's  inches.  It  would  not  carry  more  than  2,000  miner's  inches  at  the  present 
time. 

Between  the  Campbell  Divide  and  Dry  Creek  there  is  a  drop  of  296  feet,  which 
is  used  to  develop  power  by  the  Bay  Counties  Power  Company. 

During  September,  1890,  the  district  purchased  from  the  Forbestown  Ditch 
Company  29  miles  of  ditch,  with  a  crib  dam  12  feet  high  and  50  feet  long  in  Dry 
Creek,  and  about  1  mile  northwest  from  the  Oregon  House.  Of  the  29  miles  of 
ditch  10  miles  have  been  allowed  to  get  out  of  repair.  Twelve  miles  of  ditch  from 
the  Finamore  Ranch  have  been  enlarged  to  7  feet  wide  on  top,  5  feet  on  the  bottom, 
and  2.5  feet  deep,  and  made  part  of  the  main  line,  and  7  miles  comprise  what  is  now 
known  as  the  Sicard  Flat  Ditch.  The  price  given  was  $7,700  in  bonds  worth  90  per 
cent. 

In  August,  1896,  the  district  leased  to  Frank  Page  for  fifty  years  the  use  of  all 
the  water  which  the  district  claimed  (10,000  inches)  for  mechanical  purposes,  not 
inconsistent  with  the  Wright  irrigation  law  and  its  amendments,  and  not  to  interfere 
with  the  irrigation  uses  of  said  water.  In  return  for  these  privileges  said  Page 


132  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

agreed  to  pay  the  Browns  Valley  Irrigation  District  $100  a  year  in  two  equal  pay- 
ments and  keep  the  main  ditch  in  repair  and  tilled  to  its  original  capacity.  Page 
repaired  the  main  ditch,  spending  about  $12,000  on  it,  but  he  did  nothing  to  develop 
power.  In  October,  1897,  he  transferred  the  lease  to  John  Martin,  who  built  a  small 
power  house.  John  Martin  transferred  it  to  the  Yuba  Power  Company  on  October 
29,  1897.  February  4,  1899,  the  Yuba  Power  Company  transferred  it  to  the  Yuba 
Electric  Power  Company.  The  Yuba  Electric  Power  Company,  on  May  25,  1900, 
transferred  it  to  Andrew  S.  Morally;  Andrew  S.  Morally  on  June  8,  1900,  to  Bay 
Counties  Power  Company,  which  holds  it  at  present. 

By  reason  of  the  scarcity  of  water  this  year,  due  to  the  reconstruction  and 
enlargement  of  the  flume  below  the  headworks  and  the  serious  litigation  now 
pending,  actual  irrigation  is  almost  at  a  standstill.  Of  the  44,500  acres  in  the 
district,  10,500  are  above  existing  distributing  ditches.  Of  that  portion  below  these 
ditches,  the  irrigable  area  is  from  5,000  to  8,000  acres,  of  which  only  about  600  acres 
are  actually  irrigated,  as  outlined  on  the  map  of  this  district,  which  accompanies 
this  report. 

\t  PRACTICE   OF  IRRIGATION. 
DUTY   OF  WATER. 

It  is  not  possible  to  determine  the  duty  of  water  with  any  degree  of  accuracy  in 
the  district,  by  reason  of  the  inaccurate  methods  of  measuring  water.  J.  H.  Perkins, 
in  the  town  of  Browns  Valley,  successfully  irrigates  4  acres  in  clover  and  grass,  and 
one-half  acre  in  addition,  covered  with  an  orchard,  with  7  inches  of  water  used  once 
a  week  for  twenty-four  hours.  This  is  equivalent  to  the  continuous  use  of  1  inch. 
This  land  has  a  slope  of  about  4  feet  to  100,  and  no  water  runs  to  waste.  The  crops 
are  as  large  as  any  in  the  valley,  if  not  the  largest.  The  opinion  of  most  of  the 
people  of  the  district  is  that  1  inch  to  the  acre,  running  continuously  during  the 
irrigating  season,  should  be  used  on  large  tracts  of  grass  and  alfalfa.  For  orchards, 
about  1  inch  to  3  or  4  acres  is  considered  necessary.  The  duty  of  water  in  this 
district  will  always  be  low,  because  of  the  shallow  soil  and  rapid  evaporation,  due  to 
high  temperature  and  dry  atmosphere. 

Alfalfa  is  the  principal  crop  irrigated,  there  being  about  300  acres  of  alfalfa 
under  irrigation  at  the  present  time.  Besides  alfalfa  the  other  crops  irrigated  are 
citrus  and  deciduous  fruits,  garden  truck,  and  corn. 

IRRIGATION   OF   ALFALFA. 

There  seems  to  be  some  difference  of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  best  time  to  sow 
alfalfa.  Some  claim  if  it  can  be  got  in  and  up  to  a  height  sufficient  to  resist  the  win- 
ter frosts,  that  late  fall  or  early  winter  is  the  best  time  to  sow,  thus  taking  advantage 
of  winter  rains.  Others  think  that  early  in  April  or  May  is  the  proper  time.  Many 
sow  the  alfalfa  with  grain,  using  the  grain  for  a  shade  to  the  tender  alfalfa. 

The  first  crop  reaches  maturity  in  three  or  four  months,  and  is  generally  light. 
From  three  to  four  weeks  are  required  for  the  second  crop  and  from  six  to  seven  for 
the  third.  Four  crops  could  be  cut,  but  the  fourth  crop  could  not  be  cured  on  account 
of  the  winter  weather;  so  the  field  is  generally  pastured  or  cut  and  fed  green. 


FEATURE*    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    TUBA    RIVER.  133 

The  crops  are  generally  about  two  tons  to  the  acre  cured,  or  six  tons  to  the 
acre  per  year.  The  alfalfa  has  to  be  renewed  about  every  six  years,  due  to  the 
growth  of  water  grass  'and  weeds,  the  seeds  of  which  are  introduced  in  the  irrigation 
water. 

Alfalfa  is  irrigated  by  flooding — that  is,  ditches  are  led  along  the  highest  parts  of 
the  field,  from  which  water  runs  down  in  thin  sheets  over  the  adjoining  surface.  The 
winter  rains  are  sufficient  to  produce  one  good  crop  of  alfalfa,  but  in  order  to  get 
more  than  one  crop  it  must  be  thoroughly  irrigated  every  ten  or  twelve  days  during 
the  dry  season.  The  first  crop  generally  requires  two  irrigations,  the  second  crop 
three,  the  third  crop  four,  and  the  pasture  crop  two  or  three,  making  a  total  for  the 
year  of  eleven  or  twelve  irrigations.  It  may  require  a  few  more,  or  less,  depending 
on  the  character  of  the  season,  slope,  and  depth  of  soil,  etc. 

Cost  of  raising  alfalfa  per  acre. 

.     Preparing  land,  plowing,  harrowing,  cross  harrowing,  and  making  ditches $5. 00 

Seed,  25  pounds  at  8  cents 2.00 

Sowing,  harrowing  and  brushing  in 50 

Labor  of  irrigating  (11  irrigations) 2. 00 

Water  at  the  rate  of  1  inch  to  3  acres,  at  $2.50  per  inch 83 


Total 10.33 

To  this  is  to  be  added  the  cost  of  harvesting  the  crop.  Alfalfa  is  generally 
worth  $5  a  ton  in  Browns  Valley. 

IRRIGATION   OF  ORCHARDS. 

The  following  fruits  do  well:  Peaches,  apricots,  plums,  prunes,  oranges,  figs, 
pears,  almonds,  and  olives.  All  of  these  would  yield  better  if  more  skill  and  care 
were  taken  in  cultivation  and  irrigation.  The  orchards  are  generally  very  poorly 
kept.  They  are  cultivated  once  a  year  and  nothing  more  is  done  till  the  following 
year.  In  many  of  the  orchards  the  grass  and  weeds  are  2  feet  high. 

The  method  of  applying  the  water  that  is  most  generally  used  is  as  follows:  A 
ditch  is  dug  along  each  row  of  trees  and  the  water  allowed  to  run  along  the  ditch; 
most  of  the  water  runs  through  the  ditch  and  finds  its  way  into  the  nearest  creek, 
carrying  a  small  percentage  of  the  soil  with  it. 

Another  and  better  method  which  was  observed  in  use  in  a  few  orchards  was  to 
plow  the  ground  so  the  furrows  would  be  parallel.  The  ditches  were  dug  along 
the  ridges  and  in  some  instances  were  dug  along  each  row  of  trees.  From  the  ditches 
the  water  was  turned  into  the  furrows,  and  by  this  method  the  ground  was  given  a 
good  wetting. 

Most  trees  require  to  be  irrigated  every  three  or  four  weeks,  oranges  every 
twelve  or  fourteen  days.  Irrigation  of  orchards  generally  commences  in  early  June 
and  lasts  until  the  fruit  is  gathered  or  the  first  rain  comes. 

IRRIGATION   OF   HAT   AND   GRAIN. 

Hay  and  grain  are  not  usually  irrigated  in  this  district,  although  the  opinion 
seems  to  be  that  it  would  pay  to  do  -so.  In  those  instances  where  grain  has  been 


134  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

irrigated  two  or  three  times  during  the  season  the  crops  have  been  better  than  those 
on  unirrigated  land.  There  are  about  4,000  acres  of  volunteer  hay  and  grain  which 
is  cut  for  hay  in  the  district.  An  average  crop  is  1  ton  to  the'acre. 

IRRIGATION    OF   CORN    AND   STRAWBERRIES. 

Corn  and  strawberries  do  well.  The  furrow  system  of  irrigation  is  used,  and 
they  are  irrigated  every  ten  or  twelve  days. 

METHOD   USED   BY    SAM    SING    COMPANY. 

The  following  method  is  in  use  by  some  Chinamen  for  irrigating  vegetables,  such 
as  sweet  potatoes,  etc: : 

The  vegetables  are  planted  in  parallel  rows.  The  ditches  are  made  along  the 
ridges,  which  run  at  right  angle  to  the  furrows.  These  are  successively  lilled.  This 
is  continued  until  the  whole  garden  is  gone  over;  by  that  time  the  water  in  the  first 
furrow  has  all  soaked  into  the  ground.  Then,  if  necessary,  they  go  over  the  whole 
garden  again.  This  method  is  very  thorough  and  no  water  is  wasted. 

LOSS   BY   SEEPAGE   AND   EVAPORATION. 

Because  of  the  character  of  the  soil  and  the  location  of  the  main  or  lateral 
ditches,  there  is  very  little  loss  by  seepage.  Most  of  the  flumes  have  been  lately 
replaced,  and  leakage  is  reduced  to  a  minimum.  Owing  to  the  carelessness  in  the 
construction  of  the  distributing  ditches  the  loss  by  seepage  is  considerable,  the  ground 
being  wet  on  both  the  upper  and  lower  sides  for  some  distance. 

There  is  no  data  in  regard  to  the  loss  of  water  from  these  ditches  due  to  evapora- 
tion, but  it  must  be  considerable,  especially  in  smaller  ditches,  owing  to  the  extreme 
heat  of  the  summer. 

LOSS   BY   UNSKILLFUL   IRRIGATION   AND   INSUFFICIENT    PREPARATION   OF   LAND. 

Evidences  of  the  losses  due  to  unskillful  irrigation  are  visible  almost  everywhere. 
All  the  creeks  and  ravines  have  running  water  in  them  through  the  summer,  though 
before  irrigation  commences  they  are  dry.  When  irrigation  is  in  progress,  waste 
water  can  be  seen  even  in  the  roads.  With  the  exception  of  that  used  by  one  or  two 
farmers  who  utilize  the  water  flowing  in  the  ravines,  it  all  runs  to  waste;  most  of 
them  do  not  realize  that  surplus  and  waste  water  can  be  used  the  second  time. 

The  waste  from  insufficient  preparation  of  the  ground  is  considerable.  It  is  due 
to  lack  of  experience,  insufficient  means,  and  the  indifference  begotten  by  prolonged 
litigation  and  clouded  titles.  The  owners  do  not  feel  justified  in  making  lai-ge  expend- 
itures on  land  that  might  be  taken  away  from  them  at  any  time. 

MEASUREMENT. 

r- 

The  standard  of  measurement  is  the  miner's  inch  under  a  6-inch  head.  The 
method  of  measurement  is  as  follows:  A  box  with  a  gate  in  it  is  set  in  the  side  of  the 
ditch.  When  the  ditch  tender  wishes  to  turn  into  a  distribution  ditch,  say,  4  miner's 
inches  of  water,  if  the  water  in  the  main  ditch  is  about  7  inches  above  the  bottom  of 
the  box,  he  raises  the  gate  of  the  box  (a  4-inch  box)  1  inch.  If  the  water  is  more 


FKATURKS    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  135 

than  7  indies  above  the  bottom  of  the  box,  he  shuts  down  the  gate  till  he  thinks  he 
has  about  4  miner's  inches  running  through.  It  is  the  intention  to  deliver  the  num- 
ber of  inches  purchased  at  the  ranch  line.  So  if  the  water  has  to  run  some  distance 
from  the  ditch,  as  it  frequently  does,  the  ditch  tender  guesses  at  the  loss  by  evapora- 
tion and  seepage  and  adds  that  amount  to  the  amount  purchased.  If  the  farmer  thinks 
he  is  not  getting  as  much  water  as  he  is  paying  for,  he  goes  to  the  ditch  and  helps 
himself  to  all  he  thinks  he  is  entitled  to.  It  is  the  custom  along  some  of  the  ditches 
to  open  the  gate  so  that  the  number  of  square  inches  in  the  opening  is  equal  to  the 
number  of  miner's  inches  purchased,  the  ditch  tender  claiming  that  the  head  averages 
about  6  inches,  being  below  as  often  as  it  is  above. 

SEASON   OF   IRRIGATION. 

There  is  only  one  season  of  irrigation.  It  commences  in  April  or  May  and  ends 
with  the  first  rain.  It  may  commence  somewhat  earlier  or  later,  depending  on  the 
amount  and  lateness  of  the  winter  rains. 

SOIL. 

With  the  exception  of  the  extreme  western  edge  of  the  district,  where  there  is 
more  or  less  gravel,  the  soil  is  nearlv  all  red  clay,  containing  some  adobe  and  over- 
lying a  cemented  gravel  called  hardpan.  This  clay  ranges  from  1  to  5  feet  deep, 
although  in  many  places  the  bed  rock  appears  on  the  surface.  This  bed  rock-  is  slate. 
The  soil  absorbs  water  slowly  and  dries  out  quickly,  owing  to  its  shallowness.  To  be 
worked  successfully  it  has  to  be  plowed  at  just  the  right  degree  of  wetness,  otherwise 
it  will  not  pulverize.  This  is  a  strong  inducement  in  favor  of  small  ranches.  On  a 
large  ranch  there  is  a  possibility  that  there  will  not  be  enough  days  in  the  year  when 
the  ground  is  in  good  condition  to  put  in  proper  tilth  for  crops. 

EFFECT   OF   IRRIGATION   ON   SOU,. 

The  water  used  in  irrigating  the  district  has  all  been  previously  used  in  mining, 
therefore  it  is  always  more  or  less  charged  with  fine  sand  or  sediment.  From  this 
fact  the  water  is  especially  beneficial  in  irrigating  shallow  soil.  It  is  the  general 
opinion  of  the  irrigators  that  muddy  water  is  beneficial,  except  when  applied  to  the 
stems  of  very  young  plants,  or  when  alfalfa,  etc.,  are  flooded  too  deeply,  leaving  a 
sediment  that  stock  do  not  like. 

EFFECT   ON    HEALTH. 

There  seems  to  be  no  ill  effect  on  the  health  of  this  community  that  can  be 
traced  to  irrigation. 

VALUE   OF   LAND. 

It  is  impossible  to  determine  the  value  of  land  in  the  vicinitv.  The  district  has 
been  involved  in  litigation  for  some  time,  and  the  titles  to  all  the  land  in  the  district 
have  become  involved.  There  has  been  no  sale  of  land  for  several  years.  The 
opinion  of  the  people  of  the  various  parts  differs  as  to  the  value  of  the  land.  From 
$20  to  $30  per  acre  seems  to  be  the  value  placed  on  good  land  susceptible  of  irrigation 
and  not  under  cultivation,  where  it  is  under  the  diteh  and  water  can  be  got  on  it. 


136  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  same  class  of  land  above  the  ditch  is  worth  from  $5  to  $7  per  acre.  If  the 
conditions  were  such  as  to  remove  the  doubts  as  to  titles  the  price  of  land  would  rise. 
It  was  the  custom,  before  the  district  leased  the  mechanical  privileges  of  its 
water,  to  allow  the  residents  to  do  the  work  necessary  to  keep  the  system  up.  They 
were  paid  in  water  at  the  rate  of  11.50  per  day,  the  water  being  sold  at  $2. 50  per 
miner's  inch,  running  continuously  through  the  season. 

METHOD   OF   DISTRIBUTING   THE   WATER. 

The  method  of  using  the  water  is  different  in  different  parts  of  the  district.  It 
seems  to  depend  somewhat  on  the  friendliness  of  the  farmers  to  one  another.  Some 
buy  as  large  a  head  as  they  desire  to  use,  and  it  is  kept  running  continuously  whether 
used  or  wasted.  In  some  parts  of  the  district  several  farmers  will  combine  their 
rights  to  water  and  use  the  entire  head  in  turn,  the  length  of  time  varying  in 
proportion  to  each  contributor's  share.  For  instance,  if  the  combined  head  was  24 
inches  and  A  furnished  4  inches  and  it  was  decided  to  irrigate  every  12  days,  A 
would  have  the  use  of  24  inches  for  two  days  in  every  twelve.  The  reason  of  this  is 
that  one  can  irrigate  better  and  more  economically  with  a  large  head  than  with  a 
small  one.  A  very  few  make  some  attempts  at  storing  water. 

The  district  owns  no  service  reservoirs.  There  are  a  number  of  sites  for  such 
reservoirs,  as  yet  undeveloped. 

Distribution  of  water  is  arranged  as  follows:  At  any  time  a  purchaser  wants 
water  he  informs  the  secretary  of  the  district,  who  orders  the  ditch  tender  to  turn  it 
on.  The  district  charges  a  uniform  price  of  $2.50  per  inch  per  season,  whether  irri- 
gation is  started  at  the  beginning  of  the  season  or  not.  But  the  district  does  not 
guarantee  the  delivery  of  the  water. 

There  is  no  surplus  water  to  be  purchased  by  landowners  outside  of  the  district, 
but  ordinarily,  and  particularly  this  year,  there  is  a  deficiency. 


/  DUTY  OF  WATER  AROUND  AUBURN. 

This  region,  although  not  embraced  in  the  Yuba  River  watershed,  is  supplied 
therefrom,  and  it  is  deemed  advisable  to  outline  the  practice  and  results  there 
obtained. 

W.  J.  McCann  irrigates  40  acres,  of  which  about  one-half  acre  is  in  oranges,  the 
balance  deciduous  fruits,  planted  108  trees  to  the  acre.  He  uses  one  miner's  inch  to 
every  10  acres.  He  says  he  is  not  using  sufficient  water,  and  could  do  better  if  he 
used  about  H  inches  to  10  acres.  His  practice  is  to  run  a  ditch  midway  between  the 
rows  of  trees  and  one  alongside  of  each  row,  with  circles  inclosing  the  trees. 

Mrs.  Robinson  has  under  cultivation  60  acres,  of  which  50  acres  are  irrigated 
with  4  inches  of  water.  She  says  that  she  has  not  water  enough.  Olives  planted  80 
trees  to  the  acre  are  the  principal  crop,  but  peaches,  pears,  plums,  and  grapes  are 
also  raised.  She  does  not  run  the  ditches  along  the  rows,  but  runs  them  on  a  very 
light  grade  and  encircles  each  tree.  The  water  is  used  in  continuous  rotation  over 
the  tract. 

/          George  Kellogg  has  60  acres  in  his  place,  of  which  56  acres  are  irrigated  with  8 
inches  of  water.     The  ranch  is  in  deciduous  fruits,  108  trees  to  the  acre.     He  irri- 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  137 

gates  by  making  ditches  from  20  to  24  inches  from  each  row  of  trees.  He  divides 
his  8  inches  of  water  so  as  to  irrigate  several  rows  at  once,  and  lets  it  run  until  he 
thinks  these  rows  have  had  enough;  then  he  turns  it  upon  another  group,  and  so  on 
until  the  whole  orchard  has  been  gone  over. 

Ed.  Katzenstein  has  80  acres,  35  to  40  of  which  he  irrigates  with  5  inches  of 
water.  The  land  is  in  deciduous  fruits,  108  trees  to  the  acre.  Part  of  the  trees  are 
planted  in  parallel  rows,  and  the  ditch  runs  along  above  them.  The  rest  are  planted 
in  .squares,  with  the  ditch  on  the  upper  side. 

W.  R.  Fountain  has  80  acres,  of  which  55  to  60  are  irrigated  with  5  inches  of 
water.  He  thinks  he  requires  6  inches.  The  land  is  in  deciduous  fruit  trees,  planted 
18  feet  apart  in  squares.  He  irrigates  by  running  a  ditch  along  each  row  of  trees, 
and  encircles  each  tree.  Nearly  all  of  Mr.  Fountain's  land  has  a  steep  slope;  so  he 
turns  a  very  .small  amount  of  water  down  each  furrow  and  lets  the  water  cut  a  deep 
ditch.  By  doing  this  he  gets  a  high  duty,  as  the  water  does  not  wet  the  top  of  the 
ground,  but  wets  the  ground  near  the  roots,  where  the  water  is  most  needed,  and 
reduces  loss  by  evaporation. 

Charles  Carlson  has  40  acres,  which  he  irrigates  with  6  inches  of  water.  The 
whole  is  in  trees,  planted  134  to  the  acre,  except  1  acre  of  grapes.  He  uses  a  ditch 
along  each  row  of  trees,  with  a  half  circle  around  each  tree,  and  irrigates  40  rows  at 
a  time,  changing  the  water  every  twenty-four  hours.  He  gets  over  his  40  acres 
every  three  or  four  days.  Part  of  the  orchard  is  in  early  fruits  and  part  in  late 
fruits. 

COST   OF   RAISING   OLIVES   AND   PEACHES. 

It  may  be  interesting  to  add  the  cost  of  raising  the  two  principal  crops  for  which 
the  country  in  the  vicinity  of  Auburn  is  noted. 

Cost  of  raising  olives  per  acre. 

FIRST  YEAR. 

Plowing  and  cross  plowing $8.00 

Harrowing  and  cross  harrowing 3. 00 

Eighty  holes,  at  10  cents 8.00 

Eighty  trees,  at  25  cents 20.00 

Planting 8.00 

Cultivation,  twice,  at  $3 6.00 

Making  ditch 50 

Water,  1  inch  to  10  acres 4.50 

Labor  of  irrigation 1.  50 


59.50 

SECOND    YEAR. 

Plowing  and  cross  plowing $8.00 

Harrowing  and  cross  harrowing 3. 00 

Cultivation 50 

Water,  1  inch  to  10  acres 4.50 

Labor  of  irrigation 1.50 

17.50 

The  orchard  should  be  pruned  every  three  to  five  years,  at  a  cost  of  $10  per  acre. 
The  seventh  year  olives  commence  to  bear,  and  reach  full  bearing  at  ten  or  eleven 
years. 


138 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


VALUE  OF  PRODUCE. 

The  olive  crop  is  either  made  into  oil  or  pickled.  In  a  fair  3rear  olives  will  pay 
about  $200  per  acre  it'  made  into  oil.  If  the  olives  are  pickled  they  will  pay  about 
$800,  one  acre  producing  about  1,600  gallons,  which  will  bring  75  cents  per  gallon. 
The  cost  of  pickling  is  about  21  cents,  in  addition  to  the  cost  of  caring  for  the  orchards 

and  gathering. 

COST  OF  RAISING  PEACHES. 

The  cost  depends  on  the  locality  of  the  orchard.  The  maximum  and  minimum 
cost  of  several  estimates  are  given  below: 

Cost  of  raising  peachts  per  acre. 


Operation. 

Cost. 

Maximum 

Minim  in. 

FIRST  YEAR. 

tM.OO 
2.00 
a  10.  80 
16.20 
3.00 
5.00 
fi.OO 
8.00 
.75 
3.00 

$4.00 
1.00 
1.00 
16.  20 
2.00 
3.00 
4.  50 
2.150 
.50 
2.50 

SECOND   YEAR. 

Plowing  and  harrowing  

58.  75 

87.20 

4.00 
6.00 
.50 
3.10 
3.00 
2.50 
5.00 

8.  (HI 
4.50 
.50 
2.50 
.50 
.50 
2.00 

Water 

Spraying  

Cultivation 

THIRD  YEAR. 

24.10 

18.80 

4.00 
6.00 
.50 
3.10 
2.50 
2.50 
5.00 

3.00 
4.50 
.50 
2.50 
1.00 
1.00 
2.00 

Water 

Pruning  

Cultivation                             ..                 ...                                                   ... 

FOURTH   YEAR. 

23.60 

14.50 

4.00 
6.00 
.50 
3.10 
3.50 
2.50 
5.00 

3.00 
4.50 
.50 
2.50 
2.00 
2.00 
2.00 

Water     ..          .                               

Preparation  of  ground  

Cultivation  

24.  (JO 

16.50 

oSoil  very  shallow;  the  holes  have  to  be  blasted  in  the  bed  rock. 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER. 


139 


The  crop  of  the  fourth  year  will  produce  enough  to  pay  expenses,  and  it  will 
increase  to  full  bearing  about  the  sixth  or  seventh  year.  An  acre  of  prunes  or 
peaches  in  a  well-managed  orchard  ought  to  clear  on  an  average  $25  per  acre  per  year. 

PRINCIPAL  DITCHES  AND  RESERVOIRS  IN  THE   BASIN  OF  YTJBA  RIVER. 

SOUTH    YUBA   WATER   COMPANY. 

The  South  Yuba  Water  Company  was  organized  to  furnish  water  for  municipal 
supply,  irrigation,  mining,  power,  etc.  Its  range  of  operations  is  in  parts  of  Placer 


UNUSUAL  TYPES  OF  DAMS 

IN  USE  IN  THE 
VUIiA  KIVER  BASIN 

CALIWRKli 

OAM    AT    HEAD    OF     EXCELSIOR    OtTCH 


FIG.  4  —Unusual  types  of  dams  in  Yuba  River. 

and  Nevada  counties.     The  company  is  the  result  of  the  consolidation  and  absorption  \ 
of  a  number  of  water  and  ditch  companies  which  were  organized  subsequent  to  1856 
to  furnish  water  to  mines. 


N/ 


140  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

The  drainage  area  supplying  the  works  of  this  company  is  that  of  the  South 
Fork  of  the  Yuha  River,  elsewhere  described  in  this  report  (p.  118).  There  are  in 
this  area  17  storage  reservoirs. 

The  principal  reservoir  is  Lake  Fordyce,  which  has  an  extent  of  47-1  acres.  It 
is  situated  on  the  North  Fork  of  the  South  Yuba,  16  miles  above  the  head  of  the 
main  canal  and  6,500  feet  above  the  sea.  The  dam,  built  in  1873,  in  a  gorge  at  the 
outlet  of  the  Fordyce  Valley,  was  subsequently  enlarged.  It  is  now  85  feet  long, 
72  feet  high  on  the  inside,  and  90  feet  high  on  the  outside,  and  125  feet  wide  at  the 
base.  It  is  a  drv-rock  wall,  lined  on  the  inside  with  3-inch  plank,  and  has  a  waste- 
weir  100  feet  long  and  5  feet  deep.  It  cost  1300,000. 

Two  miles  to  the  north  of  Lake  Fordyce,  at  an  elevation  of  7,500  feet,  is  Meadow 
Lake,  covering  an  area  of  300  acres.  The  dam  forming  this  reservoir  is  1,100  feet 
long,  40  feet  high,  and  100  feet  wide.  Its  cost  was  $75,000. 

Stirling  Reservoir  is  likewise  situated  above  Lake  Fordyce  and  empties  into  it. 
Its  dam  is  a  rock-filled  crib,  lined  on  the  inside  face  with  3-inch  plank.  It  is  200  feet 
long,  20  feet  high,  and  cost  $20,000. 

Lake  Spaulding  forms  at  the  lower  end  of  this  group  of  reservoirs  a  distributing 
reservoir  for  the  entire  watershed.  This  reservoir  occupies  a  broad,  deep  valley,  the 
lower  end  of  which  is  a  rocky,  narrow  gorge.  In  this,  during  1891  and  ,1892,  a  dry- 
rock  dam  faced  with  plank  was  erected.  The  dam  is  290  feet  long,  67  feet  high,  and 
67  feet  wide;  and  the  outlet  is  through  a  tunnel  cut  through  granite.  The  dam  is 
provided  with  two  wasteweirs,  each  120  feet  long.  The  area  of  the  reservoir  is  215 
acres,  and  the  capacity  over  2,000,000,000  gallons. 

Bear  Valley  Reservoir  was  formed  by  building  two  dams  across  Bear  River.  One 
of  these  has  a  height  of  35  feet  and  a  length  of  140  feet;  the  height  of  the  other  is  15 
feet  and  its  length  160  feet.  The  reservoir  acts  as  a  distributing  reservoir  for  all  the 
ditches  in  the  Bear  River  watershed.  Its  area  is  60  acres,  and  its  capacity  145,411.^00 
gallons.  It  cost  $8,000. 

Summit  Reservoir  has  just  been  finished.  It  is  located  in  Summit  Valley  at  an 
elevation  of  6,800  feet,  and  is  the  highest  of  the  company's  reservoirs.  It  was  formed 
by  building  a  dam  1,580  feet  long,  with  a  maximum  height  of  35  feet.  The  con- 
struction of  the  dam  is  shown  in  fig.  4.  The  area  of  the  reservoir  is  400  acres,  and 
its  capacity  1,938,816,000  gallons.  Its  cost  was  $30,000. 

THE  SOUTH  YUBA  CANAL  SYSTEM. 

The  main  canal  of  this  system  heads  in  the  canyons  of  the  South  Fork  of  Yuba 

V    River,  three-fourths  of  a  mile  below  Lake  Spaulding.     A  small  timber  dam  diverts 

the  waters  from  the  canyon  through  a  short  tunnel  into  the  head  of  a  5  by  7  foot 

wooden  flume,  which  is  skillfully  built  or  fastened  to  the  precipitous  granite  wall  of 

the  canyon.     This  flume  terminates  in  a  canal  which  passes  over  the  low  divide  at 

the  head  of  Bear  River,  and  thence  in  two  main  canals  down  the  valley  of  Bear  River. 

The  northerly  canal  pierces  the  divide  and  leads  back  into  the  Yuba  River  drainage 

basin  through  a  tunnel  and  distributes  water  to  Nevada  City,  Grass  Valley,  and  other 

/  places.     The  southerly  canal  supplies  Coif  ax  and  Auburn  and  the  divide  between 

v    the  Bear  and  American  rivers.     The  cost  of  these  main  canals  was  $600,000.     The 

locations  are  sketched  on  the  map  which  accompanies  this  report. 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YITBA    RIVER. 


141 


The  following  table  gives  the  names,  lengths,  and  capacities  of  the  distributing 

canals : 

Distributing  canals  of  the  South  Yuba  Water  Company. 


Name  of  canal. 

Length. 

Daily 

capacity. 

Name  of  canal. 

Length. 

Daily 
capacity. 

Main  to  Bear  Vallcv                    

Miles. 

GaUnn*. 
130,000,000 

Auburn  Town  (2,000  feet  11-inch 

Miles. 

Gallons. 

16 

102  000  000 

0.875 

1  700  000 

IMltrh  Flat                                    

25 

68,000,000 

Shirlin  .                                 

4 

1,700  000 

Chalk  Bluff                                       

1J.5 

34  000  000 

Ophir 

10 

8  500  000 

g 

34  000  000 

Cook 

4 

1  750  000 

13.5 

3-1  000  000 

2 

1  750  000 

1  5 

8  500  000 

Gold  Hill 

20 

8  500  000 

Deer  Creek                                    

6 

8  000  000 

6 

2  350  000 

9 

20  400  000 

7 

850  000 

1.5 

17  000  000 

g 

1  275  000 

Wet  Hill                

2 

3,400,000 

Lincoln  

14 

1,  235,  000 

Cement  Hill 

4 

3,400  000 

5 

10  200  000 

7 

5  100  000 

4 

1  700  000 

Ridge                                              .... 

18 

34,000  000 

g 

2,550,000 

Ridge.           

6 

4,260,000 

10 

6,880,000 

4 

34  000  000 

10 

2  550  000 

4 

1,700,000 

Penryn  (1,200  feet  of  pipe)          

3 

1,700,000 

10 

8  500  000 

Greeley  (9  500  feet  11-inch  pipe) 

10 

17,000  000 

FallCreek  

11.5 

17,  000,  000 

Dutch  Ravine  

2 

58 

34  000  000 

3 

6,800,000 

6 

17,  000,  000 

Loorais  (1  mile  11-inch  pipe)  

6 

4,250,000 

Atwood  (10,000  feet  6-inch  pipe)  

3 

850,000 

Total 

380  375 

15 

8,500,000 

In  addition  to  those  listed,  the  company  owns  a  number  of  old  canals  not  now  in 
use,  which  could  be  reopened  if  water  were  needed  on  their  routes. 

The  water  appropriated  by  the  company  is  being  used  for  various  purposes. 
Nevada  City,  Grass  Valley,  Auburn,  Newcastle,  and  Lincoln  use  the  water  for 
municipal  supply.  In  Auburn  and  Newcastle  the  waterworks  are  owned  by  the 
company  outright.  In  Lincoln  the  company  owns  a  half  interest.  In  Nevada  City 
and  Grass  Valley  local  corporations  own  and  operate  the  systems,  purchasing  from 
the  South  Yuba  Company  the  necessary  water. 

To  cover  rights  of  way  and  protect  water  rights  and  reservoir  sites,  the  company 
owns  about  4,500  acres  of  land.  It  also  owns  and  operates  mining  lands  to  the 
extent  of  948.27  acres. 

THE  SALE  OF  WATEK. 

The  standard  of  measurement  is  the  miner's  inch,  which  is  the  quantity  of  water     , 
that  will  flow  through  an  aperture  1  inch  square,  the  center  of  the  aperture  being  y\ 
6  inches  below  the  surface  of  the  water,  or,  approximately,  17,000  gallons  in  twenty- 
four  hours. 

The  rate  at  which  water  is  sold  for  purposes  of  irrigation  is  $45  a  year  per 
miner's  inch.  As  1  inch  will  suffice  for  7  acres  of  land,  the  annual  expense  to  the 
farmer  is  less  than  $7  per  acre.  Water  for  power  is  sold  in  miner's  inches,  except 
in  special  cases  where  it  is  delivered  with  the  horsepower  as  the  unit  of  measure- 
ment, and  all  water  so  used  is  returned  after  use  to  the  company's  canals.  The  rate 


142  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

of  sale  is  18  cents  a  day  per  horsepower.  The  charge  for  water  sold  in  bulk  to 
municipalities  is  18  cents  and  upward  per  inch,  according  to  amount,  cost  of 
delivery,  etc.  Where  waterworks  are  owned  by  the  company  the  rates  are  collected 
from  families  on  a  gross  charge  for  general  family  use,  under  liberal  regulation 
charges.  These  average  $2  per  month  per  family. 

VALUE  OF  THE  PROPERTY. 

Including  the  water  rights  and  rights  of  way  the  entire  property  owned  by  the 
South  Yuba  Water  Company  is  now  valued  at  $4,000,000. 

SUMMIT   WATER   AND   IRRIGATION   COMPANY. 

The  property  of  this  company  is  situated  on  the  ridge  between  the  South  and 
Middle  forks  of  Yuba  River.  Its  Water  rights  represent  the  combined  rights  of 
several  companies  and  are  among  the  oldest  in  the  Yuba  River  Basin.  The  works 
were  constructed  between  1851  and  1856.  They  were  originally  constructed  to  furnish 
water  to  the  various  miners  along  the  ridge,  but  recently  the  company  has  acquired 
mining  properties  and  the  water  is  nearly  all  used  upon  these  properties. 

From  Eureka  to  the  summit  of  the  Sierras  the  geological  formation  is  principally 
granite.  The  slopes  rise  into  high  and  rugged  peaks,  some  of  which  attain  an 
elevation  of  8,500  feet.  The  Middle  and  South  forks  with  their  tributary  streams, 
such  as  Canyon  Creek,  Pass  Creek,  and  others,  rise  in  these  mountains,  among  which 
are  numerous  lakes  from  20  to  400  acres  in  area.  The  Summit  Water  and  Irrigation 
Company  has  formed  a  system  of  reservoirs  by  building  dams  at  the  outlets  of  many 
of  these  lakes. 

Eureka  or  French  Lake  is  situated  at  the  head  of  Canyon  Creek  about  4  miles 
west  of  the  summit,  and  is  the  principal  reservoir  of  this  system.  A  substantial  dam 
formed  of  granite  blocks  was  erected  in  1858  and  1859,  at  a  cost  of  f35,000.  The 
width  at  bottom  is  120  feet,  height  70  feet,  and  length  on  top  250  feet.  The  front 
is  protected  with  two  layers  of  25-inch  lumber  well  secured  to  the  face  of  the 
dam.  An  arched  sluice  is  constructed  through  the  darn,  by  which  the  flow  of  water 
is  regulated.  The  high- water  mark  is  62.5  feet  above  the  bottom  of  the  outlet.  The 
area  is  337.2  acres  and  the  capacity  661,000,000  cubic  feet.  Mr.  George  Black 
reported  in  1864  that  the  height  of  the  Eureka  Dam  could  be  safely  raised  12  feet,  or 
to  a  total  height  of  82  feet.  This  would  increase  the  "storage  capacity  of  the  dam 
262,000,000  cubic  feet.  The  catchment  area  of  the  lake  is  5  square  miles. 

The  waters  of  Eureka  Lake  flow  down  Canyon  Creek  10  or  12  miles  to  Faucheric 
Lake,  which  is  about  600  feet  lower  in  elevation.  Faucherie  Lake  is  the  basin  of  a 
natural  lake,  the  surface  of  which  was  originally  raised  by  a  dam  44  feet  high,  forming 
a  reservoir  with  an  area  of  139  acres,  a  catchment  of  3,262  acres,  and  a  capacity  of 
170,000,000  cubic  feet.  This  dam  was  washed  away  and  has  been  replaced  by  one  21 
feet  high,  which  forms  a  reservoir  with  an  area  of  90  acres,  a  capacity  of  50,900, <iuo 
cubic  feet,  or  about  one-third  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir  as  first  constructed. 
The  cost  of  this  new  dam  was  $8,000. 

Weaver  Lake  is  a  natural  lake  situated  about  2  miles  north  of  Bowmans.     Its 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  143 

catchment  area  is  small,  hut  as  it  is  commanded  by  the  Eureka  Lake  Ditch  it  can 
always  bo  filled.  Its  level  has  been  raised  by  a  small  dam  22  feet  high,  so  that  it 
now  covers  83.5  acres  and  has  a  capacity  of  150,000,000  cubic  feet. 

This  company  owns  several  other  small  lakes,  including  Jackson  Lake,  which 
have  an  estimated  capacity  of  75,000,000  cubic  feet.  The  entire  system  of  reservoirs 
places  at  their  disposal  934,000,000  cubic  feet  of  water,  which,  by  raising  the  dams, 
could  be  increased  to  1,376,900,000  cubic  feet. 

Weaver  Lake  was  tapped  by  the  Miners  Ditch,  which  has  a  capacity  of  700 
inches.  A  large  portion  of  this  canal  was  composed  of  a  wooden  flume  peculiarly 
supported  by  chains  to  the  side  of  the  canyon.  That  portion  of  the  flume  which  was 
on  the  south  bank  of  the  Middle  Yuba  was  washed  out  in  1883,  at  the  time  of  the 
break  of  the  English  Dam,  and  it  has  not  been  replaced.  The  waters  of  Weaver 
Lake  could  be  turned  into  the  Middle  Yuba  and  taken  up  by  the  San  Juan  Ditch, 
but  the  ditch  is  out  of  repair. 

The  principal  canal  of  this  system  is  the  Eureka  Lake  Ditch,  which  cost  $430,250. 
It  takes  water  from  Faucherie  Lake  and  carries  it  down  the  divide  to  Columbia  Hill. 
Its  total  length,  including  distributing  ditches,  is  54  miles.  Its  capacity  is  2,500 
miner's  inches. 

In  1876  the  company  had  154  miles  of  ditches,  with  a  total  capacity  of  25,150 
miner's  inches.  These  ditches  could  supply  only  8,800  inches  during  the  wet  season 
and  4,600  during  the  dry  season.  The  cost  of  the  ditches  and  reservoirs  of  the 
system  is  as  follows: 

Cost  of  Summit  Irrigation  Company's  works. 

Eureka  Lake  and  flume $256,000 

Smaller  ditches,  water  right,  etc 174,  250 

Eureka  Lake  Dam 35, 000 

Faucherie  Dam,  original 8,  000 

Smaller  dams 2, 000 

Other  connecting  ditches  and  water  rights 68,  000 

Miners  Ditch  and  reservoir 180,  000 

Distributing  reservoir 50, 000 

Middle  Yuba  Canal  or  San  Juan  Ditch  from  river  to  Manzanita  Hill 261, 765 

Manzanita  Hill  to  Birch  Hill 31,227 

Distributing  reservoir  below  San  Juan 18,  000 

Total 1,084,242 

It  may  be  interesting  to  give  some  figures  in  regard  to  the  cost  of  maintenance 
and  sales  of  water  under  the  system.  The  total  cost  of  maintenance  of  these  ditches 
for  the  eleven  years,  1866-1876,  was  $936,433.48,  and  the  average  cost  per  year  was 
$85,403.  During  these  eleven  years  the  company's  sales  of  water  amounted  to 
$1,988,603. 

The  company  first  started  to  sell  water  to  the  various  miners  along  the  ridge,  but 
later  it  acquired  mining  property  of  its  own  and  used  a  large  portion  to  work  its  own 
ground.  Very  little  water  is  sold  for  irrigation,  the  annual  returns  not  exceeding 
$200.  There  are  no  established  rules  in  regard  to  its  use  and  price.  The  water  is 
used  principally  on  the  small  farms  and  orchards  in  the  vicinity  of  Moores  Flat 


144  IRRIGATION    INVKSTK1ATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

KATK    1IAYKS   COMPANY. 

Thi.s  company  was  originally  known  as  the  Milton  Mining  and  Water  Company. 
In  1890  it  was  disincorporated  and  was  ivincorporated  as  the  Kate  Hayes  Company. 
The  rights  of  this  company  are  located  near  the  headwaters  of  the  Middle  Yuba, 
where  the  company  owns  several  valuable  reservoirs.  The  principal  one,  about  13 
miles  east  of  Graniteville,  is  English  Lake.  This  reservoir  was  formed  between  1856 
^nd  1858  by  constructing  three  crib  dams,  which  connected  two  granite  knobs  at  the 
lower  end  of  a  glacial  lake  with  higher  lands  on  each  side.  In  1876-77  Hamilton 
Smith,  jr.,  raised  the  height  of  the  dams  to  86.57  feet  above  the  bottom  of  the  gates. 
The  back  wall  of  the  center  dam  had  a  height  of  131  feet.  The  walls  were  of  dry 
rubble,  covering  a  solidly  filled  crib,  and  faced  with  plank  on  the  upstream  side. 
The  cost  was  $155,000.  At  81  feet  above  the  gates  the  elevation  is  6,605  feet  above 
tide,  area  363  acres,  and  capacity  650,000,000  cubic  feet,  and  the  catchment  area  is  12 
square  miles.  The  center  dam  failed  in  June,  1883,  causing  considerable  damage 
below.  It  has  never  been  rebuilt.  The  cause  of  the  break  has  never  been  ascertained. 
The  two  end  dams  are  at  present  in  fair  condition,  with  the  exception  of  the  facing 
and  flash  boards. 

At  Milton,  on  the  Middle  Yuba,  there  is  another  reservoir  site.  It,  however, 
has  never  been  developed.  This  reservoir  has  an  approximate  elevation  of  5,800  feet, 
an  area  of  90  acres,  and  a  capacity  of  28,000.000  cubic  feet.  It  could  be  utilized  at  a 
comparatively  small  cost.  A  main  dam  about  30  feet  high,  250  long,  would  be 
required,  besides  an  additional  smaller  dam  120  feet  long.  The  reservoir  has  a  catch- 
ment area  of  30  square  miles  below  the  English  Reservoir. 

At  Little  Grass  Valley  there  is  another  reservoir  site  which  would  have  an  area 
of  65  acres  and  capacity  of  62,061,250  cubic  feet  at  a  depth  of  70  feet.  The  reservoir 
hast  a  very  small  catchment  area,  but  could  be  used  as  a  service  reservoir  in  connection 
with  Milton  Ditch.  It  would  require  two  dams,  the  largest  of  which  would  be  70  feet 
high  and  600  feet  long. 

The  principal  canal  of  this  company  is  the  Kate  Hayes,  or  Milton  Ditch,  which 
takes  water  from  the  Middle  Yuba  at  Milton,  where  the  company  lias  a  small  diverting 
crib  dam.  The  canal  follows  the  main  ridge  between  the  Middle  and  South  Yuba  to 
French  Coral.  The  ditch  has  a  total  length  of  63  miles.  It  is  7. 65  feet  wide  on  top, 
4  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  3^5  feet  deep.  The  grade  is  from  16  to  32  feet  to  the 
mile.  It  was  built  in  1873-74  at  a  cost  of  $462,998,  and  its  original  capacity  was 
3,000  miner's  inches. 

Most  of  the  water  in  the  Kate  Ha\res  Ditch  is  used  at  the  Badger  Hill  Mine. 
About  200  inches  are  used  at  French  Coral  for  irrigation  and  mining.  The  low-water 
discharge  of  the  Middle  Yuba  is  capable  of  supplying  this  ditch  for  only  three  or 
four  months  of  the  year.  The  balance  of  the  time  water  is  obtained  from  the  reser- 
voirs of  the  North  Bloomficld  Gravel  and  Mining  Company. 

The  charges  made  by  the  company  are  12.5  cents  per  inch  for  ten  hours,  and  20 
cents  per  inch  for  24  hours,  for  water  used  for  irrigation.  The  farmers  along  the 
line  of  the  ditch  consider  this  rate  prohibitive  for  ordinary  crops,  and  consequently 
use  the  water  only  to  irrigate  gardens  and  orchards.  During  1900  the  owners  decided 
not  to  maintain  the  lower  end  of  its  ditch,  but,  as  this  would  leave  the  farmers  in  the 


FEATKUKS     AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OK    YI'HA     KIVKR.  145 

vicinity  of  French  Coral  without  water,  that  portion  of  the  ditc-li  between  North  San 
Juan  and  French  Coral  was  turned  over  to  Mr.  Thomas,  of  Birchville,  who  agreed  to 
keep  up  the  ditch  and  deliver  the  water  to  the  farmers.  The  company  gave  Mr. 
Thomas  the  L'OO  inches  of  water,  and  allowed  him  all  he  could  make  for  keeping  the 
ditch  up.  Mr.  Thomas  maintained  the  rates  previously  given. 

Irrigation  is  very  limited  in  this  vicinity,  there  being  in  all  about  500  acres 
watered  from  this  ditch.  The  crops  irrigated  are  alfalfa,  fruits,  and  vegetables. 
The  practice  is  to  irrigate  gardens  every  three  or  four  days,  alfalfa  every  twelve 
to  thirteen  days,  and  orchards  every  fourteen  to  sixteen  days. 

The  duty  of  water  will  always  be  low,  as  the  soil  is  a  shallow  red  clay,  and  tne 
temperature  during  the  irrigation  season  is  quite  high.  About  10  inches  of  water 
used  every  seven  days  during  the  season  of  sixteen  weeks  will  irrigate  2  acres. 

NORTH    BLOOMFIELD   GRAVEL   AND   MINING    COMPANY. 

The  North  Bloomfield  Gravel  and  Mining  Company  was  incorporated  in  1866. 
Its  water  rights  are  located  on  the  same  watershed  as  those  of  the  Summit  Water 
and  Irrigation  Company,  but  lower  down  on  Canyon  Creek,  and  embrace  the  overflow 
from  the  Summit  Water  and  Irrigation  Company's  reservoirs,  together  with  an 
additional  catchment  area  of  10  square  miles.  The  principal  reservoir  is  Bowmans 
Lake,  which  is  situated  about  <>  miles  east  of  Graniteville  on  Canyon  Creek,  a  tribu- 
tarv  of  the  South  Fork.  This  reservoir  was  designed  for  the  supply  of  water  during 
the  dry  season  to  work  the  gravel  mines  which  were  owned  by  the  company. 

In  ordinary  seasons  the  Summit  .Vater  and  Irrigation  Company's  reservoirs 
retain  all  the  water  flowing  from  the  catchment  area  of  Bowmans  Lake,  which  has 
an  extent  of  about  1!)  square  miles.  The  mean  annual  rainfall  at  Bowmans  is  about 
75  inches,  of  which  75  per  cent  is  run  off.  Two  dams  are  required  to  impound  the 
water  at  Bowmans.  The  main  one,  placed  across  the  narrow  gorge  forming  the 
outlet  of  the  valley,  has  a  maximum  height  of  100  feet  (96.25  feet  above  the  datum 
base  line)  and  an  extreme  length  on  top  of  425  feet.  The  smaller  dam,  placed  across 
a  gap  near  the  mouth  of  the  valley,  has  a  maximum  height  of  54  feet  and  an  extreme 
length  of  210  feet.  It  is  fitted  with  wasteways,  and  over  it  is  discharged  the  excess 
above  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir.  High-water  mark  is  fixed  at;  a  point  1.5  feet 
below  the  crest  of  the  main  dam.  At  this  height  the  reservoir,  with  a  surface  area 
of  over  500  acres,  contains  918,000,000  cubic  feet  of  water.  By  placing  flash  hoards 
on  the  top  of  the  wasteway  the  water  is  raised  to  the  96-foot  level  (above  datum 
base),  increasing  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir  to  930,000,000  cubic  feet.  The  stream 
feeding  the  reservoir  has  a  maximum  flow  during  great  freshets  of  5,000  to  7,000 
cubic  feet  per  second.  The  dams  at  Bowmans  Lake  have  been  designed  to  with- 
stand not  only  freshets,  but  also  any  additional  strain  due  to  the  breaking  of  the 
dams  above.  The  main  dam  cost  $15,000.  It  rests  on  solid  granite  bed  rock.  In 
1872  a  timber-crib  dam  was  built  to  the  height  of  72  feet,  the  crib  being  built  of  cedar 
and  tamarack  logs,  notched  and  bolted  together,  and  solidly  filled  with  loose  stones 
of  large  size.  A  water-tight  skin  of  pine  planking  is  spiked  to  the  upper  face. 
During  1875-76  the  dam  was  increased  to  a  height  of  100  feet  by  filling  in  a  stone 
embankment  on  the  lower  side  of  the  old  structure,  faced  with  heavy  walls  of  dry 

23856— No.  100—01 10 


146 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 


rubblestone  of  large  size.  The  downstream  face  wall  is  15  to  18  feet  thick  at  the 
bottom,  diminishing  to  6  or  8  feet  at  the  top.  Many  of  the  stones  weigh  from  0.75 
of  a  ton  to  4.5  tons.  The  lower  portion  of  the  wall  is  17.5  feet  high,  with  :i  batter  of 
15  per  cent.  It  is  built  of  heavy  stone  in  horizontal  beds.  The  backing  is  tied  to 
the  stone  by  long  iron  rods.  The  upper  portion  is  built  with  a  slope  of  45  degrees. 
A  plank  skin  is  firmly  spiked  on  the  upper  face  of  the  dam.  This  planking  is  of 
heart  sugar  pine,  3  by  8  inches,  dressed.  At  the  bottom  the  plank  is  fitted  to  bed 
rock  and  calked  with  pine  wedges.  There  are  three  thicknesses  on  the  lower  25  feet, 
two  thicknesses  on  the  next  35  feet,  and  one  thickness  on  the  upper  3(3  feet.  A  cul- 
vert, with  foundation  and  walls  built  of  heavy  dry  rubble  covered  with  heavy  granite 
slabs  16  to  18  inches  thick,  extends  through  the  dam.  Three  wrought-iron  pipes  of 
No.  12  iron,  18  inches  in  diameter,  pass  through  the  water  face  of  the  dam.  Their 
intakes  are  protected  by  a  strainer.  A  valve  is  placed  at  the  lower  end  of  each  pipe. 
The  aggregate  discharge  of  these  pipes  is  280  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  dam  is 
built  V-shaped,  with  the  angle,  of  165  degrees,  pointing  up  stream.  The  cost  was 
$151,521.  The  wasteweir  is  over  a  crib  of  round  cedar  timbers,  from  12  to  30  inches 
in  diameter,  firmly  bolted  together,  with  the  foundation  logs  securely  fastened  to  the 
bed  rock  with  1^-inch  bolts.  The  cribs  are  solidly  filled  with  granite  blocks  of 
various  sizes.  A  plank  fencing  of  3-inch  heart  sugar  pine  is  spiked  on  the  water 
face.  The  crest  of  the  original  dam  is  92.5  feet  above  datum  line,  being  4  feet  longer 
than  the  crest  of  the  main  dam.  A  light  superstructure  of  4  feet  allows  the  water 
to  be  raised  to  the  height  of  the  main  dam.  The  wasteweir  is  provided  with  twentv- 
eight  escapes,  each  4  feet  wide  and  11  feet  deep.  These  waste  ways  are  closed  when 
all  danger  from  freshets  is  passed. 

It  is  believed  that  the  structure  is  sufficiently  stable  to  allow  a  flood  of  16,000 
cubic  feet  per  second  to  pass  with  safety  through  the  wastes  and  over  its  crest..  The 
water  passing  over  the  dam  falls  on  bare  granite  bed  rock,  and  thence  down  a  steep 
gorge.1 

Besides  Bowmans  Reservoir  the  company  has  the  following  reservoirs: 

Keserroirs  of  the  North  Bloomfald  Gravel  and  Mining  Company. 


Name. 

Dam. 

High- 
water 
area. 

Altitude. 

Capacity. 

Height. 

Length. 

Sawmill  

Fed. 
39.2 
14.0 
12.8 
12  0 

Fed. 

Acres. 
80.6 
26.2 
48.8 
11.2 
8.1 
11  2 

Feet. 
5,780 

li,  -110 

6,690 
6,460 
6,590 

Cubic  fret. 
2,000,000 
3,423,816 
23,027,558 
2,395,800 
2,  907,  630 
16,000,000 

Shotgun  

50 

Island  

Middle  

Round  

11  0 

Crooked  

1  0 

The  combined  storage  capacity  of  these  reservoirs  is  961,754,804  cubic  feet,  or 
445,257  24-hour  miner's  inches. 

The  main  canal  is  the  Bloomfield  Ditch,  which  commences  at  Bowmans  Lake 
and  follows  along  the  main  ridge,  between  the  South  and  Middle  forks  of  Yuba 

1  The  above  description  of  the  Bowmans  dams  is  essentially  the  same  as  written  for  Bowie  by 
Hamilton  Smith,  jr.,  who  planned  and  constructed  the  dams 


FEATURES  AND  WATER  RIGHTS  OF  TUBA  RIVER.  147 

River,  to  the  North  Bloomfield  Mine.  Its  length,  including1  distribution  ditches,  is 
55  miles,  and  it  has  a  grade  of  12  to  16  feet  to  the  mile.  It  is  8.65  feet  wide  on  top, 
5  feet  on  the  bottom,  and  3.5  feet  deep,  with  a  capacity  of  3,200  inches.  The  ditch 
was  finished  in  1876,  at  a  cost  of  $466,467.  The  ditch  and  supports  of  the  flumes 
are  in  fair  condition,  but  the  boxing  of  the  Humes  should  be  renewed  in  many  places. 
The  following  data,  from  Bowie,  give  the  rate  of  loss  by  absorption,  leakage, 
evaporation,  etc. : 

Three  thousand  miner's  inches  of  water,  turned  in  during  the  dry  season  at  the  head  of  the 
Bloomfield  Ditch,  will  deliver  2,700  inches  at  the  gage,  40  miles  distent.  Two  thousand  four  hundred 
inches  of  water,  turned  in  at  the  head  of  the  Milton  Ditch,  formerly  delivered  at  the  gage,  29.5  miles 
distant,  1,450  to  1,600  inches;  but  at  present  2,500  inches,  turned  into  the  head  of  the  ditch,  delivers 
2,000  inches  at  the  gage. 

IRRIGATION. 

Only  a  small  fraction  of  the  water  from  the  Bloomfield  Ditch  is  used  for  irriga- 
tion, according  to  Supt.  L.  L.  Meyers,  of  North  Bloomfield.  The  total  revenue  from 
the  water  sold  for  irrigation  does  not  exceed  $25  per  annum.  This  does  not  include 
some  200  inches  which,  as  previously  mentioned,  is  sent  to  French  Coral  through  the 
Milton  or  Kate  Hayes  Ditch.  Most  of  the  water  is  used  at  the  North  Bloomfield 
Mine,  and  when  not  thus  used  is  run  to  Badger  Hill  and  Cherokee.  There  are  no 
regular  prices  for  water  used  for  irrigation,  nor  are  there  any  rules  regarding  the 
distribution  of  water  for  irrigating  purposes.  The  people  are  allowed  all  they  wish, 
provided  the  supply  of  water  in  the  ditch  is  not  reduced  below  a  certain  amount.  A 
great  deal  of  water  is  wasted  by  the  irrigators.  The  reason  the  company  does  not 
measure  the  water  which  it  sells  to  irrigators  is  that  the  revenue  from  that  source  is 
too  small  to  warrant  any  expense,  and  the  company  is  indifferent  as  to  whether  the 
people  use  the  water  or  not.  When  the  company's  mine  is  being  operated  use  is 
found  for  all  the  water  the  ditch  can  carry. 

MARYSVILLE  AND  NEVADA  POWER  COMPANY. 

This  company  has  a  water  right  at  Goodyears  Bar,  on  the  North  Yuba,  of  20,000 
miner's  inches.  It  is  intended  to  divert  the  water  at  this  point  and  carry  it  to  a  point 
opposite  Alabama  Bar,  where  it  will  be  used  to  generate  power  and  be  returned  to 
the  river. 

At  Alabama  Bar  the  same  company  has  another  right  of  10,000  miner's  inches. 
It  intends  to  divert  this  water  from  the  river  and  carry  it  to  a  proposed  reservoir  at 
the  Oregon  House  in  the  drainage  basin  of  Dry  Crdek.  This  reservoir,  with  a  dain 
130  feet  high,  will  have  an  area  of  2,000  acres.  It  is  at  an  elevation  of  1,500  feet 
above  tide.  This  elevation  is  sufficient  to  develop  a  large  amount  of  power  and  leave 
sufficient  head  to  deliver  the  water  for  irrigation  and  domestic  uses  to  coast  and 
valley  cities. 

The  company  also  has  rights  at  the  Narrows  for  25,000  inches,  and  owns  57  acres 
on  both  sides  of  the  river  at  this  point.  It  is  intended  to  use  this  water  for  power 

and  irrigation  purposes. 

CANALS. 

Daggett  Ditch  is  being  constructed.  It  takes  water  from  the  Yuba  above 
Smartsville.  The  cost  to  date  has  been  $3,000.  O'Brien  Ditch  commences  at  the 


148  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Narrows,  on  the  south  side  of  the  Yuba  River.  The  cost  of  this  ditch  to  date  has 
been. $16,000.  The  Alabama  Bar  Ditch  is  being  constructed  as  rapidly  as  possible, 
and  is  to  carry  water  from  Alabama  Bar  to  the  Oregon  House  Reservoir.  Tunnels 
and  concrete  aqueducts  are  to  be  used  on  the  ditch  instead  of  flumes.  The  tunnel 
which  is  to  divert  the  water  from  the  river  and  about  35  rods  of  the  rock  foundation 
for  the  aqueduct  had  been  constructed  at  the  time  of  examination  in  July. 

RESERVOIRS. 

Besides  the  reservoir  at  Oregon  House  Valley,  the  company  has  10  storage  lakes 
at  the  head  of  North  Yuba  River,  which  will  hold  water  to  the  extent  of  6,000  24-hour 
inches  for  five  months  in  the  year. 

EXCELSIOR  WATER  AND  MINING  COMPANY. 

The  first  water  brought  into  Smartsville,  Sucker  Flat,  and  Timbuctoo  was 
delivered  in  the  spring  of  1852  by  the  Union  Ditch  Company.  The  water  was  taken 
from  Squirrel  Crock  by  the  Triunion  Ditch,  which  was  7  or  8  miles  in  length  and  of 
a  capacity  when  first  dug  of  not  more  than  300  inches.  Its  cost  was  about  $25,000. 
It  was  afterwards  enlarged  to  a  capacity  of  1,000  inches,  at  an  additional  cost  of  $7,<»0i ). 
The  company  used  a  service  reservoir  and  stored  the  water  that  came  down  at  night, 
thus  increasing  the  day  supply.  This  was  then  regarded  as  quite  an  undertaking  and 
provided  a  sufficient  volume  of  water  to  supply  a  number  of  mining  claims.  Claims 
were  then  only  about  100  by  120  feet,  and  required  about  15  to  25  inches  of  water, 
and  worked  only  the  surface  of  the  hills  and  bars  in  the  little  ravines.  The  price  of 
water  was  about  50  cents  per  inch.  The  actual  sales  amounted  to  about  $1,800  per 
week  in  the  rainy  season.  In  the  dry  season  there  was  no  water. 

In  the  winter  of  1852  other  water  was  introduced  to  Sucker  Flat  in  what  was  and 
is  .still  known  as  The  Miners  Ditch.  It  was  started  in  opposition  to  the  Union  Ditch 
Company,  but  the  two  companies  consolidated  before  it  was  finished.  This  ditch 
took  water  from  Deer  Creek,  about  1  mile  east  of  Squirrel  Creek.  It  was  8  miles 
long,  with  a  grade  of  15  feet  to  the  mile,  and  cost  $15,000.  In  1858  it  was  enlarged 
to  a  capacity  of  1,000  inches.  It  was  abandoned  in  1866,  but  it  could  be  used  at  the 
the  present  time  by  cleaning  it  out  and  replacing  the  flumes. 

The  same  winter,  1852-53,  another  company  finished  a  ditch,  the  Riffle  Box.  This 
ditch  was  15  miles  long,  8  feet  wide  on  top,  and  4  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  3.25  feet 
deep,  and  had  a  capacity  about  the  same  as  The  Miners  Ditch.  It  cost  about  $40,000. 
Water  was  taken  from  Deer  Creek,  near  the  town  of  Rough  and  Ready.  Soon  after- 
wards this  company  consolidated  with  the  Union  Company  and  formed  what  was 
known  as  the  Triunion  Water  Company.  They  had  at  their  disposal  from  800  to 
1,000  inches  during  the  wet  season. 

During  the  winter  of  1854-55  the  survey  of  the  Excelsior  Ditch  was  made  and 
work  commenced.  Water  was  delivered  at  Sucker  Flat  during  the  winter  of  1856. 
The  ditch  had  a  grade  of  10  feet  to  the  mile,  was  6  feet  wide  on  top,  4  feet  wide  on 
the  bottom,  and  2  feet  deep,  and  had  a  capacity  of  800  inches.  The  ditch  was  17 
miles  long,  and  also  took  water  from  Deer  Creek  between  the  Riffle  Box  and  Miners 
ditches,  but  owing  to  its  being  more  circuitous  was  longer  than  either  of  the  others. 

At  the  same  time  the  Excelsior  Canal  Company  commenced  the  South  Yuba 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  149 

Ditch.  It  took  water  from  tho  South  Yuba  and  joined  their  Deer  Creek  Ditch  about 
3  miles  from  Smartsville.  It  was  built  with  a  grade  of  10  feet  to  the  mile,  was  8  feet 
wide  on  top,  6  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  2.5  feet  deep,  and  had  a  capacity  of 
2,500  inches.  Its  cost  was  about  $500,000.  The  South  Yuba  Ditch  was  not  finished 
until  the  fall  of  1859.  The  length  was  about  16  miles  from  the  South  Yuba  to  Deer 
Creek.  This  ditch  tapped  a  perennial  stream  reinforced  ))y  stored  water,  so  it  was 
very  soon  decided  to  carry  it  through  to  Sucker  Flat  by  a  different  route  from  the 
original  one.  This  lower  part  is  about  10  miles  long,  with  about  five-eighths  of  a  mile 
of  flume.  It  was  built  on  a  grade  of  10  feet  to  the  mile,  was  9.5  feet  wide  on  top, 
T  feet  wide  on  the,  bottom,  and  3  feet  deep,  and  had  a  capacity  of  3,000  inches.  The 
cost  was  $260,000.  It  was  known  as  the  China  Ditch,  and  was  finished  in  1860. 

In  the  summer  of  1857  what  is  known  as  the  Boyer  Ditch  was  commenced,  and 
finished  early  in  1858,  by  David  Boyer.  The  Boyer  Ditch  took  water  from  Deer 
Creek  and  discharged  into  the  Boyer  Reservoir.  It  was  18  miles  long,  and  had  a 
grade  of  15  feet  to  the  mile  and  a  capacity  of  1,500  inches.  Its  cost  was  about 
$120,000.  In  1859  the  Boyer  Ditch  consolidated  with  the  Triunion  Company  and  the 
name  was  changed  to  the  Union  Ditch  Company. 

Early  in  1861  the  Excelsior  Ditch  and  the  Union  Ditch  were  consolidated  under 
the  name  of  the  Excelsior  Canal  Company.  In  l§Sf-it  became  the  Excelsior  Water 
Company.  Up  to  this  time  the  business  of  the  company  had  been  to  sell  water  to  the 
various  miners  in  the  vicinity  of  Smartsville.  In  1876  it  consolidated  with  some  of 
the  mines  between  Timbuctoo  and  Smartsville,  and  became  the  Excelsior  Mining 
Company.  In  1877  it  became  the  Excelsior  Water  and  Mining  Company  by  taking 
in  additional  mines  in  tho  vicinity  of  Smartsville.  The  company  has  not  done  any 
mining  since  1896,  when  their  permit  was  revoked  by  the  United  States  engineers. 
Nearly  all  the  water  at  the  disposal  of  the  company  is  at  the  present  time  used  for 
irrigation. 

Besides  the  above  ditches  the  Excelsior  Water  and  Mining  Company  at  the  present 
time  has  the  following  ditches: 

ROUGH  AND  READY  DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  constructed  in  1850.  It  takes  water  from  Deer  Creek,  about  5 
miles  east  of  Nevada  City.  It  is  16  miles  long,  with  a  grade  of  14  feet  to  the  mile  and 
a  capacity  of  500  inches.  The  cost  was  $60,000.  There  is  a  small  diverting  dam  in 
Deer  Creek  at  the  head  of  the  ditch,  8  feet  high  and  117  feet  long  on  the  crest.  The 
ditch  delivers  water  at  Rough  and  Ready.  All  the  water  was  formerly  used  for 
mining,  but  it  is  now  used  for  irrigation. 

NEW  TOWN  DITCH. 

This  ditch  is  8  miles  long,  and  has  a  grade  of  10  feet  8  inches  to  the  mile  and 
a  capacity  of  300  inches.  It  takes  water  from  Deer  Creek  below  Nevada  City  and 
runs  to  Kentucky  Flat. 

WOODS  RAVINE  DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  built  in  1850.  It  is  4  miles  long,  on  a  grade  of  8  feet  to  the  mile, 
and  has  a  capacity  of  200  inches.  It  heads  in  Woods  Ravine  near  Nevada  City  and 
runs  to  Rush  Creek. 


150  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

PLEASANT  VALLEY  DITCH. 

This  ditch  takes  water  from  Deer  Greek  and  delivers  it  to  Hudson  Mine.  It  is 
3  miles  long,  has  a  grade  of  7.6  feet  to  the  mile,  is  28  inches  wide  on  top,  20  inches 
wide  at  the  bottom,  and  20  inches  deep,  and  has  a  capacity  of  250  inches.  All  the 
water  is  used  for  irrigation  in  Pleasant  Valley  except  50  inches,  which  is  used  at  the 
mine. 

OUSLEY  BAR  DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  built  in  1852  at  a  cost  .of  $20,000.  It  is  12  miles  long  and  has  a 
grade  of  11  feet  to  the  mile  and  a  capacity  of  600  inches.  It  takes  water  from  the 
Big  Ravine  about  300  feet  below  Union  Reservoir  and  distributes  it  to  the  vicinity 
of  Reeds  Station.  This  ditch  was  extended  by  keeping  upon  a  light  grade  and  not 
letting  the  water  drop  into  Magonigal  Ravine.  It  now  commands  all  the  land  north 
of  Dry  Creek  and  west  of  the  ditch.  The  length  of  the  extension  was  5.5  miles  and 
the  cost  $7,526. 

FARM  DITCH. 

This  was  built  in  1876.  It  heads  in  Big  Ravine  opposite  the  Timbuctoo  Ditch 
and  irrigates  the  Bonanza  Ranch.  The  size  of  the  ditch  varies.  For  the  tirst  mile,  to 
Sanfords  Ravine,  it  has  a  grade  of  0.5  inch  to  the  rod,  is  7  feet  wide  on  top,  5  feet 
wide  on  the  bottom,  and  2  feet  deep,  and  has  a  capacity  of  2,000  inches.  From  that 
point  for  1.5  miles  it  is  5  feet  wide  on  top,  3  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  2  feet 
deep,  and  has  a  capacity  of  1,000  inches.  From  there  to  the  reservoir,  a  distance  of  3 
miles,  the  capacity  is  600  inches.  The  total  length  of  the  ditch  is  5.4  miles,  300  feet  of 
which  is  in  flumes.  The  ditch  at  the  present  time  will  not  carry  more  than  400  inches. 
It  cost  $10,000.  Before  reaching  the  reservoir  a  tunnel  was  dug  a  distance  of  about 
300  feet,  so  that  water  could  be  discharged  into  the  Ousley  Bar  Ditch.  From  the 
Farm  Reservoir  there  are  two  main  ditches  that  lead  the  water  over  the  irrigated 
ground. 

SPENCEVILLE  DITCH. 

This  ditch  takes  water  from  the  China  Ditch  near  Smartsville,  and  was  built  in 
1890  at  a  cost  of  $10,000.  It  is  7  miles  long  on  a  grade  of  12  feet  to  the  mile,  is  6 
feet  wide  on  top,  3  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  2.8  feet  deep,  and  has  a  capacity  of 
600  inches. 

The  total  length  of  the  Excelsior  Company's  ditches  is  about  110  miles,  60  miles 
of  which  are  in  use.  The  total  cost  was  more  than  $1,200,000.  The  whole  mining 
district  from  Nevada  City  to  the  Sacramento  River,  bounded  by  the  Yuba  and  Bear 
rivers,  can  be  supplied  by  the  waters  of  this  company. 

The  expense  of  maintenance  of  these  ditches  is  low  compared  with  ditches  located 
higher  in  the  mountains,  for  the  reasons  that  the  ground  at  this  altitude  rarely 
freezes  and  no  snow  lies  in  winter,  and  landslides  are  of  rare  occurrence.  As  few 
flumes  are  required  between  Deer  Creek  and  Smartsville,  the  banks  of  the  ditch  have 
settled  and  become  covered  with  a  permanent  growth  of  grass  and  bushes,  and  a 
break  is  rare  even  in  the  severest  rain  storms. 


FEATURES    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  151 

DAMS. 

The,  dam  of  the  Excelsior  Water  and  Mining  Company,  in  the  South  Yuba,  was 
constructed  in  1878.  Square  timbers  were  drift-bolted  to  one  another  and  leaded  to 
the  bedrock.  Through  each  timber,  2  feet  from  the  end,  a  14-inch  rod  was  bolted  and 
extended  back  and  leaded  in  the  bed  rock.  In  the  construction  18  tons  of  1^-inch 
iron  was  used  for  braces,  bolts,  pins,  etc.  The  dam  is  26  feet  high,  60  feet  long  on 
the  bottom,  and  120  feet  long  on  the  crest.  It  is  planked  on  the  upstream  side  with 
2-inch  plank,  and  the  rock  was  piled  on  the  upstream  side  to  within  1  feet  of  the 
top.  It  cost  about  $10,000.  At  the  present  time  the  dam  is  filled  to  the  top  with 
tailings  and  is  in  as  good  condition  as  when  built.  This  dam  is  of  such  a  peculiar 
type  that  diagrams  of  it  are  shown  (fig. -4,  p.  139). 

The  dams  in  Deer  Creek,  at  the  head  of  Rough  and  Ready,  Boyer,  and  other 
ditches,  are  of  the  same  type  of  construction  as  the  South  Yuba  Dam.  The  Newtown 
and  Pleasant  Valley  dams  are  wing  dams. 

RESERVOIRS. 

The  Excelsior  Company  owns  reservoirs  as  follows: 

Union  Reservoir,  located  in  S.  E.  i  of  sec.  24,  T.  16  N.,  R.  6  E..  has  a  capacity  of 
('>.< )(  M  )  24-hour  inches.  Its  area  is  about  40  acres.  It  was  built  in  1859  by  constructing 
an  earthen  dam  700  feet  long,  30  feet  high,  5  feet  wide  on  the  crest,  and  100  feet 
wide  on  the  bottom,  having  a  riprap  stone  wall  laid  on  the  inside.  Its  cost  was 
$20,000. 

Boyer  Reservoir,  located  in  N.  ^  sec.  2,  T.  15  N. ,  R.  6  E. ,  has  an  area  of  20  acres 
and  a  capacity  of  1,000  24-hour  inches.  It  was  built  in  1858,  and  has  a  dam  similar 
in  type  to  the  one  at  Union  Reservoir,  600  feet  long,  8  feet  wide  on  the  crest,  78  feet 
wide  on  the  bottom,  and  20  feet  high.  Its  cost  was  $4,000. 

Besides  these  there  are  a  number  oFsmall  reservoirs  and  a  number  of  undeveloped 
reservoirs,  the  sites  for  which,  the  company  owns.  At  Indian  Springs,  by  building 
a  dam  100  feet  high,  a  reservoir  could  be  made  which  would  cover  246  acres  and 
store  296,000  24-hour  inches.  This  reservoir  would  have  a  watershed  of  about  10 
square  miles,  but  it  could  be  filled  from  existing  ditches.  At  the  Garsaway  Ranch, 
by  building  a  dam  105  feet  high  and  1,080  feet  long,  there  could  be  stored  90,000 
24-hour  indies,  making  a  reservoir  with  an  area  of  139  acres. 

RIGHTS  IN  DEER  CREEK. 

The  Excelsior  Water  and  Mining  Company  claim*  and  holds  all  the  existing 
water  rights  on  Deer  Creek  from  1  mile  east  of  Nevada  City  to  where  it  flows  into 
the  main  Yuba.  Hence  practically  all  Deer  Creek  water  belongs  to  the  Excelsior 
Company.  There  may  be  some  water  used  above  the  S3rstem,  but  it  all  comes  back 
to  the  stream  above  the  head  of  the  Rough  and  Ready  Ditch.  All  the  water  that 
finds  its  way  into  the  Excelsior  Ditch  below  the  Rough  and  Ready  Ditch  in  the  sum- 
mer time  is  waste  water.  It  consists  of  sewage  of  the  town  of  Nevada,  waste  from 
the  mines,  and  waste  from  irrigation. 


152  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

\VATKU  I!K,JITS  IN  SOITH  YVHA. 

The  company  claims  and  holds  all  the  South  Yuba  water,  and  water  from  all  its 
tributaries  below  or  west  of  the  South  Yuba  Water  Company's  systems.  It  claims 
that  no  other  company  has  any  prior  right  to  any  natural  waters  that  are  discharged 
into  the  South  Yuba  or  any  of  its  tributaries  below  or  west  of  the  South  Yuba  Canal 
Company's  system. 

Nearly  eveiyone  having  land  situated  so  that  it  can  bo  watered  from  the  ditches 
does  more  or  less  irrigating.  The  crops  irrigated  are  alfalfa,  orchards,  gardens,  and 
grain,  the  latter  being  irrigated  only  during  very  dry  years. 

In  1898  the  area  irrigated  with  water  from  this  system  was  1.8S4  acres;  in  1899, 
1,352  acres,  and  in  1900,  1,251  acres. 

The  company's  charges  for  water  depend  on  the  kind  of  crop  imgated.  Six 
dollars  per  acre  per  season  is  charged  for  grass,  and  $5  per  acre  per  season  for 
orchards.  Irrigators  are  allowed  all  the  water  they  want.  They  are  supposed  to  use 
it  by  rotation,  but  water  is  so  abundant  that  there  is  generally  no  trouble  in  getting 
it  except  on  a  few  smaller  ditches,  such  as  the  Spenceville  Ditch. 

The  waste  of  water  due  to  its  abundance  and  to  unskilled  irrigation  is  great, 
lully  60  per  cent  of  water  turned  on  the  fields  runs  off  and  into  the  nearest  ravine. 
All  the  water  which  runs  into  Deer  Creek  above  the  headgate  of  the  China  Ditch  is 
picked  up  again  by  that  ditch  and  utilized,  but  all  that  runs  in  below  is  wasted. 
That  which  runs  itito  Big  Ravine  above  the  Farm  Ditch  is  saved. 

The  value  of  good  land  above  the  ditch  is  from  $12  to  $15  per  acre;  the  same 
class  of  land  below  the  ditch  brings  $25  to  $30  per  acre.  The  soil  is  a  red  clay  con- 
taining a  small  percentage  of  iron  and  copper.  It  is  from  2  to  5  feet  deep,  but  when 
properly  irrigated  and  worked  it  will  raise  good  crops.  Hay  in  1900  was  worth  $1(1 
per  ton,  and  most  of  the  crop  was  shipped  to  Nevada  City  and  Grass  Valley. 


In  1858  the  Nevada  Reservoir  Ditch  Company  built  a  ditch  from  Wolf  Creek,  a 
tributary  of  Bear  River,  to  the  gravel  mines  neai  Smartsville.  Water  was  turned 
into  the  ditch  by  a  crib  dam  in  Wolf  Creek  about  15  feet  high.  The  ditch  is  :>u 
miles  long  and  on  a  grade  of  12  feet  to  the  mile.  The  first  27  miles  it  i,s  6  feet  wide 
on  top,  4  feet  wide  on  bottom,  and  2.5  feet  deep,  with  a  capacity  of  800  miner's 
inches.  The  last  3  miles  had  a  capacity  of  1,200  inches.  The  total  cost  was 
about  $75,000.  Along  the  line  of  the  ditch  there  are  several  drops  which  might  be 
utilized  to  develop  power — one  -4  miles  from  the  headgate,  of  75  feet;  another  10 
miles  from  the  headgate,  of  150  feet;  a  third.  28  miles  below,  of  150  feet;  and  one  29 
miles  below,  of  150  feet. 

The  company  owns  two  small  reservoirs  along  the  line  of  the  ditch  which  are 
situated  about  1  mile  apart.  The  lower  one  is  about  3  miles  from  the  end  of  the 
ditch.  They  have  an  area  of  20  and  15  acres  respectively.  During  the  dry  season 
the  ditch  depends  on  the  waste  water  from  the  Grass  Valley  mines. 

Very  little  water  is  used  from  this  ditch  for  irrigation,  there  being  only  about 
100  acres  watered  in  all.  Five  dollars  per  acre  per  season  is  charged  for  the  use  of 
water.  The  customer  is  allowed  as  much  as  he  wants  whenever  he  wishes  it.  The 


KK.VITUKS    AND    WATER    RIGHTS    OF    YUBA    RIVER.  153 

water  is  principally  used  at  the  Blue  Point  Mine.     The  ditch  is  now  the  property  of 
the  New  nine  Point  Mining  Company. 

The  South  Yuba  Water  Company  supplies  water  to  the  mines  near  Grass 
Valley,  so  the  water  which  this  ditch  carried  from  a  tributary  of  Bear  River  to.  the 
Vuba  is  returned  to  the  drainage  basin  from  which  it  was  diverted. 

POWER   STATIONS   IN   THE    BASIN   OF   YTJBA   RIVER. 

A  number  of  electric  power  companies  utilize  the  water  of  Yuba  River.  The 
Central  California  Hlectric  Company  has  a  station  near  Newcastle,  and  also  one  near 
Auburn.  At  the  Newcastle  station  water  is  taken  from  the  South  Yuba  Water 
Company,  to  which  the  electric  company  is  allied,  and  carried  to  a  power  house 
6,400  feet  distant  in  a  24-inch  riveted  sheet-steel  pipe.  From  there  the  power 
developed  is  transmitted  80  miles  to  Sacramento,  at  15,000  volts,  where  it  is  used  for 
lighting  and  general  purposes.  The  Auburn  station  utilizes  a  fall  of  200  feet  within 
a  distance  of  half  a  mile,  found  on  the  Bear  River  Canal  of  the  South  Yuba  Water 
Company,  about  1  mile  south  of  Auburn.  A  reservoir,  capable  of  holding  a  day's 
supply  of  water,  was  built  at  the  head  of  Auburn  Ravine.  A  pipe  of  riveted  sheet- 
steel  3,100  feet  in  length,  with  a  diameter  ranging  from  56  inches  down  to  36  inches, 
connects  the  reservoir  with  the  power  house.  The  power  generated  is  also  trans- 
mitted to  Sacramento,  34  miles  distant.1 

The  Bay  Counties  Power  Company  has  a  station  on  the  South  Yuba  River, 
about  6  miles  from  Nevada  City.  Water  is  diverted  from  the  river  about  1  mile 
above  Perdons  Bridge  by  a  crib  dam  38  feet  high  and  150  feet  on  the  crest,  the  cost 
of  which  was  $18,000.  The  flume  is  4  miles  long,  5  feet  on  the. bottom,  4.5  feet 
deep,  and  has  a  grade  of  1.5  inches  to  the  rod  and  a  capacity  of  about  7,000  inches. 
Its  cost  was  $55,000. 

On  Rock  Creek,  which  is  a  tributary  of  the  South  Yuba,  there  is  an  artificial 
reservoir  with  a  capacity  of  40,000  24-hour  _inches  under  6-inch  pressure.  This 
reservoir  is  formed  by  a  crib  dam  across  Rock  Creek,  built  in  1898  at  a  cost  of 
$25,000.  The  dam  is  54  feet  high  and  251  feet  long.  The  ditch  from  the  dam  to  the 
power  house  has  a  capacity  of  750  inches,  and  cost  $7,500.  There  is  also  a  small 
emergency  reservoir  at  the  top  of  the  hill  above  the  power  house,  which  has  a 
capacity  of  500  inches  for  one  hour.  In  case  of  a  sudden  call  for  power  the  water  is 
drawn  from  the  Rock  Creek  Reservoir.  It  takes  water  one  and  one-half  hours  to 
come  to  the  power  house,  so  the  emergency  reservoir  serves  until  the  Rock  Creek 
water  reaches  the  power  house.  The  power  house  was  finished  in  18!»«i,  and  subse- 
quently enlarged.  At  present  it  contains  four  alternating-current  Stanley  genera- 
tors, each  having  a  capacity  of  500  horsepower,  which  generate  a  current  directly  at 
a  potential  of  5,500  volts.  Each  generator  is  directly  connected  to  and  driven  by 
two  sets  of  water  wheels.  The  power  generated  is  transmitted  4  miles  to  Nevada 
City,  and  thence  4  miles  to  Grass  Valley,  where  it  is  used  to  supply  all  the  public  and 
private  lights  and  the  small  demands  for  power.  Diverting  lines  are  carried  to  the 
mining  districts,  and  power  is  now  supplied  to  run  motors  of  from  1  to  450  horse- 

'The  description  of  the  Newcastle  plant  is  condensed  from  an  article  in  Electric  World  for 
December  18,  1897;  that  of  Auburn  plant  from  the  American  Electrician  for  September,  1899. 


154  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

power,  which  are  used  to  operate,  pumps,  hoists,  and  other  mining  macninery.  This 
plant  is  of  great  importance  to  this  region  because  of  the  high  price  of  fuel,  which 
caused  the  shutting  down  of  many  mines.  The  company  delivers  a  current  for  power 
at  an  average  price  of  $5  per  month  per  horsepower  for  constant  loads. 

The  same  company  has  a  station  near  Dry  Creek,  20  miles  northeast  of  Marys- 
vine.  The  water  is  taken  from  the  flume  at  Colcgate  and  conveyed  through  "25  miles 
of  ditch  to  the  forebay,  then  to  the  power  house  through  850  feet  of  30-inch  riveted 
sheet-steel  pipe,  affording  an  effective  head  of  296  feet. 

The  power  is  transmitted  by  pole  line  to  Marysville,  a  distance  of  20  miles,  and 
used  for  lighting  the  city  and  general  power  purposes.  There  is  also  an  8-mili> 
circuit,  delivering  lights  and  power  for  mining  purposes  at  Browns  Valley,  both 
power  and  light  being  taken  from  each  circuit.  They  also  send  power  to  the  power 
house  of  the  Nevada  division  when  that  power  house  is  unable  to  carry  its  load. 

College  Station  is  also  owned  by  the  Bay  Counties  Power  Company,  and  is  situ- 
ated on  the  main  Yuba  River  at  a  point  about  -i  miles  above  the  junction  with  the 
South  Fork.  Construction  was  commenced  in  May,  1899,  and  is  still  being  continued. 
The  company  holds  the  Page  lease  of  the  mechanical  privileges  of  the  water  of 
Browns  Valley  district,  and  claims  an  additional  right  to  10,000  inches  in  the  North 
Yuba  at  the  headgates. 

The  dam  in  the  North  Yuba  has  been  raised  to  a  height  of  37  feet,  and  a  new 
flume,  6  by  7  feet,  on  a  grade  of  13  feet  to  the  mile,  with  an  estimated  capacity  of 
300  cubic  feet  per  second,  has  been  built  from  the  dam  to  Colegate,  a  distance  of  7.6 
miles.  From  the  forebay  to  the  power  house  there  is  a  drop  of  695  feet,  which  is 
used  to  develop  power.  The  water  is  to  be  conveyed  to  the  wheels  in  five  30-inch 
pipes,  two  of  which  are  now  laid.  They  have  a  length  of  1,600  feet,  the  first  700 
feet  being  riveted  steel,  and  the  lower  900  feet  cast  iron. 

The  company  intends  to  deliver  power  at  San  Francisco  and  intermediate  points, 
a  total  distance  of  140  miles.  The  total  cost  of  the  plant  will  be  $3,000,000, 
$2,300,000  having  already  been  expended. 

At  Dobbins  a  reservoir  is  being  built  to  be  drawn  on  in  case  the  water  in  the 
flume  has  to  be  shut  off.  Its  capacity  will  be  about  35,000,000  cubic  feet.  Dobbins 
Creek  will  be  able  to  fill  it  during  the  rainy  season.  If  it  becomes  necessary  to  refill 
it  in  the  summer,  part  of  the  water  which  runs  to  waste  during  the  period  of  minimum 
load  is  to  be  used  to  lift  the  balance  up  to  the  lake.  When  the  reservoir  is  drawn 
on  the  water  will  be  used  twice — once  to  generate  power  at  the  forebay  under  a 
head  of  330  feet,  and  again  at  the  power  house  under  the  605-foot  head. 


IRRIGATION  INVESTIGATIONS  ON  CACHE  CREEK. 

ByJ.  M.  WILSON,  C.  E., 
Agent  and  Expert. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  district  to  which  the  investigations  described  in  this  report  were  directed  is 
the  watershed  and  valley  of  Cache  Creek  (PI.  XI).  It  embraces  the  county  of  Yolo 
and  parts  of  Lake  and  Colusa  counties.  All  of  Lake  Count}'  is  mountainous,  as  is 
also  that  part  of  Colusa  County  which  is  drained  by  Cache  Creek.  The  western 
boundary  of  Yolo  County  is  the  crest  of  the  eastern  ridge  of  the  Coast  Range.  The 
eastern  slope  of  this  ridge  covers  about  one-third  of  the  county  and  is  of  little  value 
agriculturally,  except  as  a  stock  range.  To  the  east  of  this  mountain  region  lies  a 
border  of  low  hills;  beyond,  the  great  Sacramento  Valley  stretches  away  in  an 
almost  unbroken  plain,  from  Suisun  Bay  on  the  south  to  Red  Bluff  on  the  north,  a 
distance  of  about  MO  miles.  The  topography  is  well  shown  in  the  section  of  Drake's 
relief  map  of  California  as  given  in  PI.  XII.  Yolo  is  the  second  county  north  from 
the  bay,  and  lies  directly  across  the  river  and  west  from  the  city  of  Sacramento. 

As  with  most  of  the  agricultural  country  west  of  the  Missouri  River,  the  stock- 
man was  the  first  occupant.  Pasturage  was  abundant,  and  continued  throughout  the 
year.  The  mild  winters  seemed  to  make  unnecessaiy  the  providing  of  food  for  stock, 
as  in  the  more  rigorous  climate  of  the  East.  Following  the  discovery  of  gold  in 
1848  came  the  rapid  development  of  the  mines  and  the  golden  age  of  California, 
bringing  a  ready  market  for  all  staple  products  at  remunerative  and  sometimes 
fabulous  prices.  The  stockman  had  every  encouragement  to  expand  his  herds,  but 
with  the  winter  of  1861-6:2  came  unprecedented  floods  and  disaster.  It  was  estimated 
that  40  per  cent  of  the  cattle  in  Yolo  County  perished  from  the  effects  of  storms, 
floods,  and  lack  of  food.  The  spring  of  1862  was  again  favorable,  and,  stimulated  by 
good  prices,  which  still  prevailed,  the  cattlemen  sought  to  retrieve  their  losses.  With 
1863  came  scanty  rainfall,  to  be  followed  again  in  1864  by  a  drought  of  unprecedented 
severity.  There  was  no  food  for  the  stock,  and  it  either  perished  or  was  sold  for  a 
song,  to  be  driven  over  the  mountains  into  Nevada.  The  cattlemen  were  ruined. 
The  reign  of  the  vaquero  was  over. 

In  the  meantime  the  agricultural  interests  were  gaining  ground,  and  it  had  become 
apparent  that  the  returns  from  tilling  the  soil,  though  more  modest,  were  less  pre- 
carious than  those  from  stock  raising.  It  had  also  developed  that  the  soil  and  climate 
were  particularly  adapted  to  the  production  of  small  grains.  Prices  were  good  and 
shipping  facilities  improving.  From  experimenting  with  a  few  acres  in  1849  and 
1850  .the  area  cultivated  was  increased  until  in  1860  there  were,  in  round  numbers, 
39,000  acres  seeded,  chiefly  to  wheat  and  barley.  By  1866  the  acreage  had  increased 
to  87,000.  From  this  time  forward  the  increase  was  steady  till  in  1900  the  total  area 
reported  under  cultivation  in  wheat  and  barley  alone  is  249,848  acres. 

Before  California  became  a  part  of  the  United  States  the  lands  extending  along 
both  sides  of  Cache  Creek  from  the  head  of  the  Capay  Valley  to  Sacramento  River 
had  been  granted  away  by  the  Mexican  Government.  The  Rancho  Canada  de  Capay 
extended  from  the  head  of  the  valley  to  near  the  present  site  of  the  town  of  Madison, 

155 


156 


IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


a  distance  of  about  8  leagues,  and  contained  9  square  leagues.  Below  this  the  Guesisosi, 
or  Gordon,  grant  extended  for  2  leagues  down  the  stream,  and  contained  2  square 
leagues.  The  Rancho  Rio  Jesus  Maria,  or  Hardy  grant,  extended  from  the  east  line 
of  the  Gordon  tract  west  to  the  Sacramento,  and  contained  6  square  leagues.  These 
grants  were  subsequently  confirmed  by  the  United  States  Government. 

The  land  laws  in  force  for  several  years  after  California  became  a  State  .favored 
the  acquisition  of  large  bodies  of  land  by  single  individuals.  Advantage  was  taken 
of  this  by  the  early  settlers,  many  of  whom  acquired  large  landed  estates,  and  their 
extensive  holdings  have,  by  keeping  the  population  sparse,  been  unfavorable  to  the 

development  of  the  country. 

CACHE  CREEK. 

Cache  Creek  has  its  rise  in  the  mountains  of  Lake  and  Colusa  counties.  Its 
principal  and  most  reliable  source  is  Clear  Lake,  which  occupies  about  80  square 
miles  of  Lake  County  and  has  a  watershed  of  about  420  square  miles.  It  is  also  fed 
during  the  rainy  season  and  early  summer  by  the  north  branch  of  Cache  Creek. 
which,  with  its  tributaries,  rises  in  the  northern  part  of  Lake  County  and  the  western 
part  of  Colusa  County.  No  continuous  record  of  the  flow  of  the  stream  has,  so  far 
as  I  can  learn,  ever  been  kept,  but  during  the  rainy  season  it  is  estimated  to  range 
from  500  to  1,200  cubic  feet  per  second  under  ordinary  conditions  to  30,0oo  cubic 
feet  per  second  in  time  of  extreme  flood.  This  flood  flow  lasts  for  a  few  hours  only. 
During  the  winter  the  North  Fork  and  its  branches,  with  a  watershed  of  about  200 
square  miles  in  the  eastern  part  of  Lake  County  and  the  western  part  of  Colusa 
County,  discharge  a  large  volume  of  water,  but  with  the  close  of  the  rainy  season 
their  flow  diminishes,  and  after  the  middle  of  June  their  discharge  is  ordinarily 
of  little  importance.  On  June  29,  1900,  the  discharge  from  the  North  Fork,  as 
measured  by  A.  E.  Chandler,  of  the  University  of  California,  was  only  5.1  cubic 
feet  per  second.  On  the  same  date  he  found  that  the  flow  in  the  main  stream,  which 
is  fed  by  Clear  Lake,  was  161.4  cubic  feet  per  second. 

During  the  summer  of  1900  we  made  gagings  on  Cache  Creek,  as  f ollows: 

Gayings  of  Cache  Creek,  1900. 


Approxi- 

mate dis- 

Point of  gaging. 

tance 
from 

Date. 

Discharge. 

Clear 

. 

Lake. 

Cubic/eel 

. 

Miles. 

per  second. 

2 

Aug    20 

39  66 

County  bridge  at  Rumscy  

30 

June  29 

1M  77 

Do 

30 

Aug    27 

''7  01 

On  line  between  J.  F.  Hughes  and  Robert  Boyle,  in  sec.  15,  T.  11  N.,  R.  3  W  

38 

June  29 

167.  47 

Sec  6,T.10N.,R.2  W  

45 

do 

173  60 

County  bridge  at  Capay  

50 

June  28 

161.60 

n 

152  69 

M 

do 

1-10  h" 

62 

July     3 

a  75  88 

70 

do 

53  04 

East  line  sec.  12,  T.  ION.,  R.  2  E  

75 

..    do. 

651.32 

aOnJulyS  the  Moiire  Ditch  was  diverting  00. 52  cubic  feet  per  second  between  Madison  Bridge  and  Stephens  Bridge, 
making  the  total  flow  in  this  section  of  the  stream  136.40  cubic  IVrt  |,,-r  second. 

6  All  water  passing  this  point  is  wasted  in  the  sink  or  passes  into  .Sacramento  Slough. 


U.  S.  Dept.  c*  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  cf  Expt.  Stations. 


T.16K. 


Scale  o 


L.EGKND 

Sedimentary   soil      (wash  from  Cache  Creek) 

I |       Adobe  soil    covered   m  spots   snd  streaks   with  hill  wash 

'.5.1  '    Swamps  and   overflowed   lands 
Mountai  ns 

i  Cult.vated  hills 

—   •  »       Canals    in  operation 

-.—.—*      Canals   not  in   use  or    abandoned 

Surveyed   boundary  of  swamp   lands 


Plate  XI. 


MAP 

OF 

CACHE  CREEK  AND  CLEAR  LAKE 

SHOWING    THE 

DRAINAGE   AREA,  IRRIGATION  'WORKS 
(UIAIIACTER    OF  ADJACENT  LANDS 

CALIFORNIA 


l.l  E.  } 


U.  S.  Oept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  ExpT.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XII. 


o 


r 
> 


O 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CRKEK. 


157 


Iii  addition  to  the  above,  A.  E.  Chandler,  of  the  University  of  California,  kindly 
furnishes  the  following: 

(liiyimjs  <m  Cache  Creek,  1900. 


Approxi- 

mate dis- 

Point of  KRtfiiitf. 

tance 

from 

Date. 

Discharge. 

Clear 

Lake. 

Cubicfeet 

Miles. 

per  second. 

At  outlet  of  Clear  Lake  

00 

July  17 

Above  confluence  with  North  Fork  

12 

Abo\x-  confluence  with  Bear  Creek  

24 

June  ''7 

('on  nl  v  bridge  at  Rumsey  

30 

Do  

North  of  Tailored  

40 

do 

Due  mile  west  of  Captiv  

50 

July  21 

88  10 

The  two  sets  of  gag  ings  give  a  fair  idea  of  the  summer  flow  of  the  stream,  and 
the  two  gagings  at  Rumsey  June  29  and  August  27  show  how  the  flow  diminishes 
as  the  season  advances. 

In  the  summer  of  1898  the  water  ceased  to  flow  from  the  lake  into  Cache  Creek, 
and  during  this  season  the  water  of  the  lake  reached  the  lowest  stage  on  record,  being 
nearly  li  feet  below  the  low-water  mark  of  1873,  which  up  to  this  time  had  always 
been  considered  the  extreme  of  low  water. 

A  further  study  of  the  gagings  made  during  the  summer  of  1900  shows  that  a 
considerable  portion  of  the  water  of  this  stream  sinks  into  the  coarse  gravel  which 
has  accumulated  in  the  channel  where  the  stream  enters  Sacramento  Valley  proper 
and  where  the  steep  grade  of  the  channel  ends.  There  is  here  a  stretch  of  about  7 
miles,  extending  from  above  Capay  to  a  point  near  Madison  Bridge,  where  the  bed  of 
the  stream  usually  shows  no  running  water  after  the  1st  of  August.  Near  the  Madi- 
son Bridge  the  stream  again  begins  to  flow,  and  at  the  Moore  Dam,  -1  miles  below,  it 
again  reaches  a  maximum.  Below  this  it  sinks  again.  A  comparison  of  the  meas- 
urements in  the  first  series  of  gagings  taken  Juno  28  and  July  3,  inclusive,  beginning 
at  Rumsey  and  extending  to  the  canal  through  the  sink  east  of  Woodland,  shows 
where  the  IOSSQS  take  place  when  there  is  enough  water  to  keep  the  flow  in  the  channel 
continuous. 

Much  of  the  loss  of  water  shown  between  the  gorge  above  Capay  and  the  Capay 
Bridge  occurs  in  the  last  mile.  The  loss  from  Capay  down  to  Madison  Bridge  is  quite 
regular.  After  Madison  Bridge  is  passed  the  waste  is  small.  The  sum  of  the  vol- 
umes in  the  Moore  Ditch  and  in  the  stream  at  the  Stephens  Bridge  nuiy  be  fairly 
assumed  as  the  flow  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  dam.  The  loss  between  the  Stephens 
Bridge  and  Nelson  Bridge  seems  quite  heavy,  but  part  of  this  was  diverted  by  the 
pumping  plants  which  were  in  operation  along  this  section  at  the  time  these  measure- 
ments were  in  progress.  The  loss  between  Nelson  Bridge  and  Hennigen's  is  not 
great,  and  evaporation  would  account  for  most  of  this.  All  the  water  passing  Hen- 
nigen's is  wasted  except  the  small  volume  used  for  stock.  Later  in  the  season  when 
the  flow  is  not  continuous  the  proportion  of  loss  at  all  points  is  greatly  increased. 

For  the  first  few  miles  after  leaving  Clear  Lake  the  course  of  Cache  Creek  is 


158  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

through  a  comparatively  open  country.  For  the  next  25  miles  it  is  a  mountain 
stream,  flowing  over  a  steep  and  rocky  bed  and  through  deep  gorges.  About  30 
miles  from  the  lake  it  passes  into  Capay  Valley,  through  which  it  flows  for  about  20 
miles,  when  it  emerges  into  the  main  Sacramento  Valley.  Its  course  here  is  almost 
directly  eastward  some  25  miles  to  the  point  where  it  discharges  into  the  canal  which 
drains  the  country  east  of  Woodland.  The  fall  for  the  first  3  miles  after  leaving  tln> 
lake  is  about  22  feet.  The  next  9  miles  brings  us  to  the  junction  with  the  North 
Fork.  The  fall  in  this  section  is  about  350  feet.  The  fall  between  this  point  and 
Rumsey,  where  it  enters  the  Capay  Valley,  some  20  miles  below,  is  about  500  feet. 
In  Capay  Valley  the  fall  is  about  200  feet.  Through  the  Sacramento  Valley  the  fall 
to  the  slough  is  about  150  feet.  The  total  fall  from  Clear  Lake  to  the  town  ot  Yolo 
is  approximately  1,275  feet. 

STORAGE. 

Clear  Lake  lies  about  80  miles  north  of  San  Francisco,  in  one  of  the  valleys  of  the 
Coast  Range,  at  an  elevation  of  1,325  feet  above  sea  level.  The  lake  and  its  watershed 
occupy  the  larger  portion  of  the  county  of  Lake.  Its  area  is  about  80  square  miles, 
and  it  receives  the  drainage  from  about  420  square  miles  of  rough,  mountainous 
country.  The  moisture  precipitated  on  these  slopes  soon  finds  its  way  through  the 
steep  channels  of  the  mountain  streams  into  the  lake.  The  most  important  of  these 
streams  are  Scotts  Creek,  Middle  Creek,  Clover  Creek,  Kelsey  Creek,  Cole  Creek, 
and  Siegler  Creek.  None  of  them  contributes  much  water  to  the  lake  except  during 
the  rainy  season.  The  outlet  is  toward  the  southeast  through  a  break  in  the  eastern 
ridge  of  the  Coast  Range.  This  channel  where  the  stream  leaves  the  lake  is  through 
a  low,  flat.valley,  and  is  in  this  part  from  30  to  100  feet  wide  and  from  4  to  8  feet 
deep.  It  is,  except  at  the  extreme  lower  end  of  this  section,  at  the  same  level,  and 
is  for  all  practical  purposes  a  continuation  of  the  lake. 

At  the  end  of  this  section  the  water  passes  over  what  is  known  locally  as  Grigsby 
Riffle.  The  flow  through  this  channel  would  naturally  tend  to  lower  the  outlet  and 
to  finally  drain  the  lake,  but  this  tendency  is  counteracted  by  Siegler  Creek.  This 
stream  enters  from  the  south  nearly  at  right  angles  to  the  outlet.  It  is  a  mountain 
stream  carrying,  in  times  of  flood,  much  debris  of  coarse  gravel  and  small  stones. 
Grigsby  Riffle  is  the  bar  which  this  stream  has  built  up  in  the  channel  from  the  lake. 
The  fall  in  Siegler  Creek  for  the  last  mile  of  its  course  is  about  30  feet,  and  above 
it  is  still  steeper.  The  fall  in  Cache  Creek  below  the  riffle  is  moderate,  not  over  5  or 
6  feet  to  the  mile,  and  the  current  is  much  impeded  by  willows  and  other  growth. 
The  constant  flow  from  the  lake  hardly  suffices  to  keep  the  channel  open  to  its  full 
capacity.  When  the  lake  is  at  its  low-water  stage  and  Siegler  Creek  in  flood,  its 
discharge  is  sufficient  to  gorge  the  outlet  below  the  riffle  to  such  an  extent  that  the 
water  sets  back  into  the  lake  with  a  marked  current.  At  such  times  the  deposit  on 
the  bar  or  riffle  accumulates  faster  than  it  can  be  carried  away,  and  tends  to  perma- 
nently raise  the  level  of  the  lake.  Some  fears  have  been  entertained  by  dwellers 
along  the  shore  and  owners  of  lands  lying  along  the  lake  that  serious  damage  may  he 
caused  in  this  way,  and  some  attempt  has  been  made  to  prevent  this  by  changing  the 
channel  of  Siegler  Creek  near  the  mouth,  throwing  the  discharge  farther  eastward, 
below  the  riffle.  Some  digging  and  plowing  has  also  been  done  on  the  riffle  in  times 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations 


PLATE  XIII. 


:  x v< >IA >  <  -01 TNTTES, 

CALIFORNIA. 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  159 

of  low  water  with  the  purpose  of  loosening  the  material,  so  that  it  may  be  carried 
down  by  the  current.  The  water  of  the  lake,  starting  at  the  riffle  from  a  state  of 
rest  over  a  not  very  steep  grade,  has  little  transporting  power  and,  with  the  flat 
grade  and  clogged  channel  of  the  section  below,  any  material  moved  in  this  way  from 
the  riffle  is  deposited  at  a  point  a  little  lower  down.  While  the  diversion  of  Siegler 
Creek  and  the  work  on  the  riffle  may,  for  the  time  being,  prevent  the  raising  of  the 
water  level,  the  ultimate  effect  is  to  make  the  bar  a  more  permanent  and  effective 
obstacle  to  the  passage  of  the  water.  The  outlet  of  the  lake  being  thus  impeded,  the 
water  accumulates  during  the  rainy  season,  causing  a  fluctuation  in  the  surface  from 
extreme  low  to  extreme  high  water  of  some  12.7  feet.  The  ordinary  range  of  fluctu- 
ation is  much  less  than  this.  The  variation  between  mean  high  and  mean  low  water 
is  about  5.5  feet.  The  highest  stage  was  reached  January  25,  1895,  and  the  lowest 
November  20,  1898.  The  extreme  of  high  water  causes  great  inconvenience  to 
dwellers  on  lands  contiguous  to  the  lake  and  also  interferes  seriously  with  naviga- 
tion, the  ordinary  wharves  and  landings  under  such  conditions  being  all  submerged. 
The  lake  is  not  deep  at  any  point,  the  extreme  depth  over  a  small  area  ranging  from 
•10  to  50  feet.  Along  the  borders,  especially  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  points  where 
it  is  desirable  to  make  landings,  the  water  is  shoal  and  grown  up  with  tule  or  coarse 
water  grasses.  At  extreme  low  water  a  considerable  body  of  this  tule  land  is  par- 
tially drained  and  a  large  area  of  mud  flats  exposed  to  the  action  of  the  sun,  producing 
conditions  which  are  a  serious  menace  to  the  health  and  prejudicial  to  the  reputation 
of  the  towns  on  the  lake  as  health  resorts.  The  approach  to  the  ordinary  landings  is 
also  cut  off  at  such  times,  thus  interfering  with  the  navigation  of  the  lake.  By  the 
improvement  and  control  of  the  outlet  all  these  difficulties  might  be  overcome.  This 
would  require  the  straightening,  widening,  and  deepening  of  the  channel  from  the 
lake  to  the  point  where  the  stream  begins  to  fall  rapidly,  and  the  construction  of  a 
system  of  regulating  works  adequate  for  the  passing  of  a  large  volume  of  water  when 
the  level  of  the  lake  approaches  the  high-water  danger  point.  When  the  danger  is 
past,  these  gates  could  be  closed  and  the  water  passed  down  through  the  channel  as 
needed  for  use  below.  By  so  conserving  the  waters  the  level  of  the  lake  need  never 
fall  to  the  low  stage  which  it  now  often  reaches.  If  the  range  of  levels  were  confined 
to  from  3  feet  above  extreme  low  water  to  8  feet  above,  the  evil  effects  of  both 
extremes  would  be  avoided;  it  would  then  be  possible  to  make  permanent  wharves 
and  to  reclaim  all  land  above  the  high-water  mark  fixed.  Siegler  Creek  could  be 
disposed  of  by  diverting  it  into  the  lake  farther  west,  above  and  south  of  the  point 
where  the  channel  leaves  the  lake  proper.  The  waters  of  Siegler  Creek  would  be 
thus  conserved  and  the  debris  which  now  interferes  and  chokes  the  channel  would 
gradually  fill  up  and  render  useful  a  considerable  body  of  now  worthless  tule  land 
near  the  lower  end  of  the  lake,  which  affords  a  large  evaporating  surface,  without 
adding  materially  to  the  available  storage  capacity  of  the  lake. 

In  the  accompanying  plate  (XIV)  the  upper  diagram  shows  graphically  the 
rainfall  in  inches  on  Clear  Lake  watershed  for  each  month  for  a  period  of  nine  years, 
1891-1899.  It  is  the  average  reported  by  three  observers:  D.  C.  Euinsey,  of  Lake- 
port;  F.  M.  Porter,  of  Kono  Tayee,  and  W.  A.  Maxwell,  of  Kelseyville.  The 
second  diagram  shows  the  fluctuations  of  the  surface  of  Clear  Lake  in  feet  for  the 
same  period  and  is  constructed  from  three  sets  of  observations  made  by  D.  C.  Rumsey, 


160  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

of  Lakeport;  Captain  Athcrton,  of  Lakcport,  and  F.  M.  Porter,  of  Kono  Tayee. 
The  zero  line  in  this  diagram  is  the  extreme  of  low  water  recorded  in  these  observa- 
tions. This  occurred  November  20,  1898.  A  study  of  these  two  diagrams  will  show 
how  the  level  of  the  lake  fluctuates  in  response  to  the  precipitation  in  the  watershed 
and  how  the  impeded  outlet  of  the  lake  retards  the  escape  of  the  water  and  helps  to 
maintain  the  flow  in  Cache  Creek  after  the  rains  have  ceased.  The  third  diagram 
covers  the  same  period  and  shows  the  rainfall  reported  to  the  U.  S.  Weather  Bureau 
by  the  observer  at  Woodland,  and  represents  fairly  the  precipitation  on  the  agricul- 
tural lands  of  Cache  Creek  Basin. 

A  study  of  the  third  diagram  shows  that  in  1897  the  rain  practically  ceased  in 
Cache  Creek  Basin  before  the  1st  of  April  and  did  not  begin  again  until  some  time 
in  November,  a  period  of  seven  months;  that  in  1891,  1892,  1893,  1895,  and  1896  the 
rain  ceased  in  May;  that  in  the  remaining  three  years,  1894,  1898,  and  1S99,  the  dry 
season  began  by  the  close  of  June.  It  should  be  further  noted  that  for  three  of  these 
years  there  was  no  rain  that  could  benefit  crops  for  five  months,  for  another  no  rain 
for  four  months,  for  two  years  no  rain  for  three  months,  and  for  three  others  no 
rain  for  two  months. 

A  study  of  the  last  diagram,  in  connection  with  the  first  and  second,  suggests 
that  a  remedy  for  the  shortage  of  water  in  the  Cache  Creek  Valley  lies  in  the  utiliza- 
tion of  the  reservoir  possibilities  of  Clear  Lake.  Here  is  a  great  natural  reservoir, 
receiving  the  precipitation  from  500  square  miles,  and  all  that  is  needed  to  put  it  into 
use  is  the  defining  and  protecting  of  the  rights  to  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek,  the 
rights  of  the  riparian  owners  on  Clear  Lake,  and  the  regulation  of  the  flow  of  the 
water  from  the  lake. 

POWER   POSSIBILITIES    OF    CACHE    CREEK. 

After  leaving  Lower  Lake  there  is  no  irrigable  land  until  Capay  Valley  is  reached. 
On  this  part  of  the  stream  we  have  conditions  peculiarly  favorable  for  the  develop- 
ment of  power.  This  is  especially  the  case  below  the  junction  with  the  North  Fork. 
This  branch  and  the  other  streams  entering  below  the  lake  would  furnish  a  good 
volume  during  the  rainy  season  even  if  the  waters  of  the  lake  and  all  that  could  be 
stored  in  other  reservoirs  should  be  cut  off.  When  those  streams  fail  the  accumulated 
waters  would  be  needed  below  for  irrigation,  and  storage  would  thus  augment  the 
flow  available  for  power  purposes.  We  have  here  what  too  often  is  impossible  to 
secure,  a  harmony  of  interest  between  the  power  used  and  the  irrigator. 

Farther  down  the  stream  leaves  Capay  Valley  proper  and  makes  a  detour  behind 
a  spur  of  the  mountains,  passing  through  a  deep  gorge.  It  reappears  in  the  valley 
about  3  miles  above  the  town  of  Capay.  At  this  gorge  and  in  the  vicinity  of  Capay 
conditions  are  favorable  for  the  further  development  of  power  without  serious 
interference  with  the  use  of  the  water  for  irrigation. 

SOIL. 

Capay  Valley  is  about  20  miles  long  and  has  a  width  varying  from  1  to  4  miles. 
The  land  is  not  of  uniform  quality.  About  one-third  of  the  area  is  a  rich,  sandy 
loam  made  up  of  the  finer  sediment  washed  in  from  the  hills.  This  is  very  fine  fruit 
and  alfalfa  land,  and  being  sheltered  from  winds  and  late  frosts  this  region  is  pecul- 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.     Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XIV. 


DIAGRAM  SHOWING  THE  I'KKCII'ITATIOX  IN  THE  DRAINAGE  BASIN  OF  CLEAR  LAKE,  THE  RESULTING  FLUCTUATIONS  IN  THF 
DEPTH  OF  TUE  LAKE  AND  THE  INADEQUATE  RAINFALL  IN  CACHE  CREEK  VALLEY 


a;  5  J  z  j  uii  >-  >  ~ 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  161 

iarly  fitted  for  the  production  of  early  fruits  and  vegetables.  About  one-half  of  the 
area  of  this  valley  is  :i  stiff  clay  or  adobe.  This  is  more  difficult  to  work,  and  under 
irrigation  requires  drainage  and  the  exercise  of  care  and  judgment  in  the  use  of  water 
to  get  the  best,  results.  At  present,  except  at  the  upper  end  of  the  valley,  where  a 
good  deal  of  fruit  is  produced,  most  of  the  valley  and  the  smoother  hill  slopes  are 
given  over  to  wheat.  The  valley  being  narrow,  water  used  for  irrigation  can  not  be 
taken  far  from  the  stream,  and  a  large  part  of  the  water  diverted  must  return  in  the 
form  of  seepage.  This  would  be  especially  true  of  the  water  used  in  winter  irriga- 
tion, which  would  return  gradually  during  the  following  summer.  It  is  a  common 
experience  in  other  localities  that  the  use. of  water  in  the  upper  reaches  of  a  valley 
like  the,  Capay  results  after  a  little  time  in  an  increase  of  the  summer  flow  of  the 
stream  below.  It  takes  a  little  time  to  establish  the  new  regime,  but  there  is  no 
doubt  that  a  liberal  use  of  water  in  the  winter  and  early  spring  in  Capay  Valley  will 
improve  Cache  Creek  as  an  irrigating  stream. 

Cache  Creek  in  times  of  flood  brings  large  quantities  of  sediment  from  the  hills. 
Since  the  country  has  been  settled  and  the  hills  pastured  the  volume  of  such  material 
brought  down  is  much  increased.  Some  of  it  is  deposited  in  the  upper  valley,  and 
much  of  the  best  fruit  and  alfalfa  land  of  this  section  is  built  up  of  this  deposit,  but 
the  larger  part  of  this  material  is  carried  out  into  the  lower  valley,  where,  because  of 
the  change  of  grade  and  consequent  slower  velocity  of  the  stream,  it  is  dropped. 
The  bed  of  the  stream  is  gradually  being  filled  up  with  this  wash.  The  coarser 
material  is  deposited  where  the  grade  first  flattens,  and  the  lighter  sediment  is  carried 
on  below.  The  gravel  beds  in  which  the  stream  sinks  near  Capay  are  the  accumula- 
tions of  the  coarser  material.  During  floods,  when  the  river  gets  outside  its  banks, 
the  suspended  material  is  deposited  on  the  submerged  lands  nearest  the  stream.  The 
creek  has  thus  built  up  along  its  banks  a  ridge  of  this  sedimentary  matter.  The 
material  transported  when  the  stream  does  not  escape  from  its  banks  and  such  as  is 
carried  in  the  main  current  in  the  greater  floods  is  deposited  on  the  west  side  of  the 
great  Sacramento  Slough.  There  is  a  strip  of  this  material  several  miles  wide 
extending  from  above  Blacks  Station,  in  the  northern  part  of  Yolo  County,  to  Putah 
Creek,  in  the  southern  part,  a  distance  of  about  18  miles.  The  average  width  of 
this  strip  is  about  6  miles.  The  location  and  extent  of  this  deposit  is  shown  on 
the  map  (PI.  XI,  p.  156).  There  is  no  finer  agricultural  soil  than  this  sedimentary 
deposit.  It  is  mellow,  warm,  and  fertile,  with  good  drainage,  yet  holding  a  reserve 
of  moisture  to  resist  drought.  It  is  ideal  grain,  alfalfa,  and  fruit  land.  You  may 
find  growing  on  this  soil  wheat,  barley,  oats,  corn,  alfalfa,  all  the  vegetables  of  a 
temperate  and  subtropical  climate,  apples,  apricots,  nectarines,  plums,  pears,  prunes, 
oranges,  lemons,  limes,  figs,  pomegranates,  grapes  (table,  wine,  and  raisin),  olives, 
almonds,  English  walnuts,  berries  of  all  kinds,  and  melons.  Some  of  these  lands 
are  better  adapted  to  particular  crops  than  others,  yet  I  venture  to  say  that  there 
arc  80-acre  tracts  of  this  sedimentary  soil  in  this  valley  on  which  every  thing  that 
has  been  named  is  now  produced,  and  I  am  not  sure  but  that  within  a  single  block 
in  the  town  of  Woodland  most  of  these  fruits  and  vegetables  can  be  found  growing. 
There  is  of  this  choice  land  in  Yolo  County  approximately  50,000  acres  in  one  body 
which  may  fairly  be  considered  as  Cache  Creek's  contribution  to  this  deposit,  and 

23856 — No.  100—01 11 


102  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

perhaps  20,000  acres  of  the  same  character  lying  to  the  north  and  along  Putah 
Creek.  This  estimate  does  not  include  any  of  the  Putah  Creek  deposits  south  of  that 
creek,  as  my  investigations  did  not  extend  southward  beyond  the  limits  of  Yolo 
County. 

The  low  hills  to  the  north  of  Cache  Creek  and  the  lands  of  Hungry  Hollow 
lying  between  them  and  the  creek  are  largely  an  adobe  soil.     They  are  fertile,  but 
require  care  in  working  at  the  proper  stage  of  moisture  to  secure  the  best  results.-.- • 
It  is  good  grain  land,  and  with  irrigation  alfalfa  and  other  forage  and  many  kinds  of 
fruit  and  vegetables  could  be  produced  with  profit. 

The  land  lying  to  the  south  of  Cache  Creek,  between  Madison  on  the  north  and 
Winters  on  the  south,  and  between  the  mountains  on  the  west  and  the  .sedimentary 
lands  before  described,  is  a  mingling  of  red,  black,  and  gray  adobe.  The  red  and 
black  adobe  are  good  soils  and  with  proper  handling  produce  good  crops.  The  gray 
or  white  adobe  is  not  so  good,  but  with  favorable  seasons  will  produce  fair  crops  of 
grain.  In  some  places  this  soil  is  strongly  impregnated  with  alkali  salts,  and  these 
are  the  least  valuable  lands.  The  mountains  which  lie  to  the  "west  are  of  sandstone 
formation,  and,  being  steep,  the  streams  which  flow  down  from  them  bring,  during 
the  rainy  season,  much  light  sandy  material,  which  is  deposited  after  the  streams 
reach  the  open  country.  Where  the  streams  drain  large  areas  and  carry  much 
water,  as  in  the  Chicahominy  and  Buckeye  sloughs,  this  sediment  is  pushed  well  out 
into  the  valley.  In  SQIIIC  places  this  deposit  is  quite  deep  and  covers  considerable 
areas.  With  irrigation  this  light  soil  is  very  productive,  but  without  artificial 
watering  it  will  not  retain  enough  moisture  to  mature  crops  in  dry  seasons.  Where 
this  material  is  deposited  in  moderate  quantities -it  is  just  what  is  needed  to  correct 
the  tendency  in  the  adobe  land  to  run  together  and  bake.  Much  might  be  done 
toward  controlling  and  directing  these  deposits  over  this  adobe  land  with  great 
advantage  to  the  crops  produced. 

The  adobe  lands  of  this -south western  part  of  Yolo  County  are  inclined  to  be 
cold,  and  impenetrable  to  air  and  moisture.  They  need  drainage,  sand,  and  humus. 
The  use  of  water  on  these  lands  without  providing  for  drainage  would  probably  be 
of  little  benefit,  if  not  disastrous.  With  a  good  system  of  drainage  and  an  intelligent 
and  systematic  distribution  of  the  wash  from  the  hills,  and  of  the  burden  of  fine  sand 
and  earth  carried  in  the  winter  waters  of  Cache  Creek,  the  soil  would  be  rendered 
friable  and  warm  and  correspondingly  more  productive.  The  lack  of  humus  could 
be  supplied  by  the  plowing  under  of  green  crops  and  the  growing  of  alfalfa.  With 
systematic  and  thorough  treatment  along  the  lines  suggested  it  is  believed  that  much 
of  this  large  body  of  land  could  be  brought  to  a  high  state  of  productivity.  The 
first  essential,  however,  in  any  successful  treatment  of  these  lands  is  drainage,  and 
any  attempt  that  neglects  this  is  likely  to  result  in  disappointment. 

The  lands  lying  between  the  sedimentary  deposit  and  Sacramento  River  are  low 
and  wet.  This  is  a  part  of  the  great  stretch  of  swamp  land  extending  from  Glenn 
County  southward  through  Colusa,  Yolo,  and  Solano  counties,  parallel  with  Sacra- 
mento River,  to  Suisun  Bay.  In  times  of  high  water  this  territory  is  for  the  most 
part  submerged.  It  takes  the  drainage  from  the  watersheds  of  all  the  counties 
named,  and  from  Lake  County  and  a  large  part  of  Napa  County.  It  also  receives 
large  contributions  from  Sacramento  River  when  it  is  in  flood.  In  fact,  the  waters 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREKK.  163 

of  the  Sacramento  are  .systematically  discharged  over  this  swamp  land  whenever  the 
river  threatens  the  dikes  of  the  reclamation  districts.  Some  attempt  has  been  made 
to  facilitate  the  discharge  of  this  water  by  a  canal  through  the  lower  part  of  this 
tract  connecting  southward  with  the  bay,  but  the  capacity  of  the  canal  as  constructed 
is  entirely  inadequate  for  the  volume  to  be  discharged,  and  when  the  floods  come  the 
•  lands  remain  under  water  much  longer  than  is  good  for  them  or  convenient  for  those 
who  occupy  them.  While  it  is  not  probable  that  the  water  can  be  prevented  from 
covering  a  large  area  of  this  territory  when  the  Sacramento  is  in  flood,  if  this  canal 
were  deepened  and  widened  there  is  a  great  deal  of  rich  land  that  is  now  of  little 
value  that  could  be  brought  into  productive  use. 

WHEAT  GROWING. 

The  leading  agricultural  industry  of  this  section  is  the  production  of  wheat  and 
barley.  The  wheat  and  barley  are  sown  during  the  fall  and  winter  and  grow  during 
the  cool  months  of  winter  and  spring.  There  is  usually  rainfall  sufficient  to  mature 
them.  Without  irrigation  these  are  practically  the  only  field  crops  that  can  be 
matured.  The  land  has  been  so  long  cropped  with  these  grains  I  hat  the  grain- 
producing  elements  of  the  soil  are  showing  signs  of  exhaustion  and  the  yield  has 
seriously  diminished. 

When  prices  are  favorable  there  is  something  very  taking  about  the  methods  of 
the  wheat  growers  of  this  region.  Gang  plows  drawn  by  teams  of  eight  or  ten  horses 
turn  the  soil.  The  man  with  the  harrow  rides  behind  on  horseback  while  directing 
his  team.  The  seeding  L<  done  in  the  same  large  way.  The  harvester,  drawn  by 
32  horses  or  a  traction  engine,  cuts  and  thrashes  and  delivers  in  sacks  each  day  the  grair 
from  20  to  30  acres.  The  straw  is  burned.  In  the  spring  succeeding  the  harvest  the 
land  is  plowed  and  then  lies  fallow  until  the  following  fall,  when  it  is  again  seeded. 
But  without  irrigation  there  can  be  no  rotation  of  crops  and  no  chance  for  the  soil  to 
recuperate.  It  is  a  fascinating  but  destructive  system  of  agriculture,  and  the  farmers 
of  Yolo  County  are  paying  the  penalty  in  steadily  diminishing  crops.  Where  once  the 
returns  were  40  to  60  bushels  to  the  acre,  the  farmer  now  receives  12  to  30  bushels. 
This,  with  the  low  prices  prevailing,  has  rendered  grain  farming  very  unprofitable. 
Only  those  who  by  operating  on  a  large  scale  secure  the  full  advantage  of  labor- 
saving  machinery  can  now  make  wheat  farming  profitable.  The  tendency  of  all 
this  is  to  the  elimination  of  the  small  farmer  and  an  increase  in  the  acreage  of  the 
larger  landholders. 

I  would  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  advocating  the  abandonment  of  grain 
growing  in  this  section.  The  natural  conditions  are  here  peculiarly  favorable  for 
the  production  of  wheat  and  barley,  and  their  cultivation  will  always  be  a  leading 
industry,  not  only  in  Yolo  County,  but  throughout  the  whole  Sacramento  Valley. 
What  I  deprecate  is  the  wasteful  and  destructive  system  which  is  impoverishing  the 
land  and  ruining  the  farmer.  With  the  rotation  of  crops,  which  irrigation  would 
make  possible,  these  lands  might  soon  be  restored  to  their  former  fertility.  A  less 
area  in  wheat  with  a  larger  production  would  mean  success  where  now  is  failure. 

The  small  farmer  is  falling  behind,  and  his  lands  are  gradually  passing  into  the 
possession  of  his  more  prosperous  neighbors  or  into  the  hands  of  the  trust  companies 
from  whom  he  has  borrowed  money  to  keep  up  the  fight.  Many  once  pleasant  homes 


164  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

are  now  deserted  and  falling  into  decay,  occupied  for  a  few  d:iys  during  each  of  the 
seasons  of  plowing,  sowing,  and  harvesting,  by  a  Chine.se  cook  who  prepare*  the  meal* 
for  the  men  who.  living  in  their  blankets,  are  employed  temporarily  for  this  work. 
There  can  be  no  healthful  social  life  under  such  conditions  of  isolation  as  the  pre.vnt 
system  entails. 

APPROPRIATION  LAWS  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

In  1873  the  law  of  appropriation  was  placed  on  the  statutes  of  California.  It  is 
familiar  and  does  not  need  to  be  reproduced  here.  The  idea  of  posting  a  notice  in 
order  to  fix  a  right  has  its  origin  in  the  practice  of  the  miner  in  locating  mineral 
claims.  The  miner's  notice  was  posted  on  the  tract  claimed  and  described  its  bound- 
aries. It  was  a  sufficient  notice  to  all  cornel's  of  what  was  taken.  Another  miner 
could,  with  this  before  him.  fix  the  boundaries  of  another  claim  without  risk  of  inter- 
ference. It  accomplished  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  designed.  Some  California 
genius,  whose  name  is  lost  to  fame,  conceived  the  idea  that  a  notice  posted  at  the 
point  of  diversion  would  be  just  as  efficient  in  fixing  and  defining  a  claim  for  water. 
and  so  it  passed  into  the  statutes  to  be  copied  almost  verbatim  by  nearly  every  one 
of  the  arid  States  at  some  stage  of  their  irrigation  career.  How  a  notice  posted  in 
the  tide  swamps  at  the  outlet  of  Clear  Lake  could  be  seen  and  regarded  by  a  citizen 
of  Yolo  County,  50  miles  away,  is  not  clear.  The  statute  imposed  no  restrictions  as 
to  the  volume  that  might  be  appropriated  by  a  single  claimant,  and  as  a  result,  each 
claimed  without  regard  to  his  own  needs  or  to  the  prior  uses  of  others.  If  the  United 
States  Government  had  permitted  or  authorized  settlers  upon  its  unsurveyed  lands 
to  each  claim  everything  within  reach  of  his  vision,  and  had  allowed  the  claimants  to 
settle  the  boundaries  of  their  respective  claims  by  appeal  to  the  local  courts,  we  should 
have  had  the  same  trouble  with  the  land  boundaries  that  we  now  have  with  water 
rights,  except  for  this,  that  a  dispute  between  A  and  B  as  to  the  location  of  their  land 
lines  and  the  manner  of  its  adjustment  need  not  necessarily  be  of  any  interest  to  Z, 
who  lives  in  another  county,  while  the  adjustment  of  A  and  B's  differences  over  a 
water  right,  either  by  agreement  or  by  the  decree  of  a  court,  may  mean  the  practical 
extinguishment  of  the  other  rights  to  the  waters  of  a  stream. 

The  manner  of  making  a  record  under  the  law  is  equally  faulty.  Instead  of 
bringing  together  in  one  place  the  record  of  the  filings  on  the  same  stream,  the  filings 
are  distributed  in  the  records  of  the  various  counties  through  which  a  stream  or  its 
tributaries  flow.  In  the  case  under  consideration,  the  records  of  the  counties  of  Yolo, 
Lake,  and  Colusa  were  searched  before  all  the  filings  could  be  located.  In  order  to 
show  the  character  of  this  record,  an  abstract  of  the  filings  on  Cache  Creek  in  Yolo 
and  Lake  counties  is  given  in  the  following  tables: 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATrONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK. 


165 


"3                         j=   =                HI                s  *                                 'S  S 

1 

- 

1                          3^                 2*                  °  1   »                               1°" 

"3 

c 

i            f  *        5  „  I      11                 •§  s 

% 

E 
' 

5    •?                                             Stf       •                    "o    .U     S                             a§uO                                     fl^aJC 

(Z 

<°           E°"      ?  u  "      s  E  "*                Is* 

3  £                 3                    :                  8  *          1  i              | 

a 

!  •§                        a                                                2   1              *  1:   ci              s 

o 

I 

B 

a  J                                            g  ^             J3  2   a            " 

> 

--                      s-=                   =                     -3   e   «       £   *   S             g. 

5 

i;|                  »   o-                  •                      1   °  S.       •§  |  2             o.  S 

*s 

1 

•=   1    :                    §7                                               •c'|t'=sf              11 

s 

—      *"—                               J3S                                O                                         SS~""'T—  "                       S.IT-                        ! 

5 

g 

7. 

a  ""                  :                     :                  co                  £ 

C 

_5 

li       iiii:  H  §  i  ii 

-J 

I 

fc.*^                                •--'^T'-^'^                  "^    "Si 

£* 

i 

i    '•"                         BrfP«Ms8         "^   " 

s 

"o    R                             —     -7^~'z:5"^ 

i 

a. 
a 
s 

s 

la        yil'llill  I1     -        ! 

•o 

-i 

I 

!-        »f£sliii    a5!!  ^        ~ 

E 

•9 

Sfo                        .7^-—  53iocS*-3"s£'       ti 

E 

0 

=    i:-                 r'^^'S-5'J.'^—   jj^^i.       o                      5 

.S 

I 

111     Hi  !!!i-  ill!  1  1  i       l     ' 

t 

«, 

I 

i  "                  ft*           c'£a"°'"£               fc                  £ 

; 

•                                                       M_Ct«                    -)      ^—      JS         '                    -t-»      —         •                     »* 

*J         •                     M 

n 

0 

1 

to 

r^ 

version. 

jjfjj                                jj!  1 

1    1     •    J 

F     fi*   fl    J 

ill! 

jlji 

ouse  of  Yol< 

- 
S 

nt  of  di 

1  1  n  1  2  p      i     iiii!piiiSj 

=il- 

-     . 

is 

*  -E 

V     C8 

S 

S. 

a  1  S    S  S    8  -g,                           o                           ^^".S's'|a"":£-^'9§-5;j: 

«  *  •  J 

^:   — 
w    fc 

! 

—      i-'^"C-^<.                                        .                                     «*S°£"at*^^o5'5r3    —     "S 
=      S     ^    —      *     <     o                                                                            o*^"~            U*-»OK;joi;''*'r 

*     0    ^    j 

s   O 

o    . 

.1111:1111-. 

j          f        1J     ;i      «        S 

IB 

*s 

1                 1  ^           3  1                       S              | 

'c 
» 

1                 ^s           ^=           I           Q              I 

02                                                                           0     *                                                      K                              O 

c 

1 

«                11          |B          1          1            1 

< 

85 

^                   C               S               m            o               > 

i» 

'•                   S                S                I            |               1 

s>  « 

CJ                                        —  r                                —  T                               Q"                         —  J1                               ,_T 

^  0 

g                   3                   S               2                                    c 

c 

M 

0 

t»                    *•                8                i!             *»                S 

§                    s                5                •<             s                ^ 

t 

J,  ,. 

X                                                 OC                                         »                                        00                                J 

i                 2-              ij                           » 

"OB 

2  be 

3                          •                     H                                        •§.                      o                 < 

a;                                                      »                        „•                  5                      *                  T 

C                                                       fe                                          "Q 

c 

1 

3J_C 

6 

,_,                                                        ..j                                              «                                              -!•                                    1C                                              «                                   t- 

at 

z, 

166 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIOKS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


,C             j§     0                     s§     CJ              5     « 

±    fl 
cd     t> 

0     H 

i 

5      s  4         s  3      I  5 

S  4 

mount  claim 

O              _    d                     .    =3              .    oj 

s  s        s  s     |B 

2         H    e    »         fcaifeg 
6fl      •     ~     3     i3                   3     «     5     3     t* 

TS  -H           8               5           s;           c 

c 

c 

I| 

IM     . 

_    -0     $            C                          0                          C 

8  S  £      a              o              "= 

2  o  *   s    e.       *   s    p.  °-  a    P, 

5  a  a 

Eg                9            S 

§ 

§ 

f.i     fl  l!fii 

l&2-Sl&£^-SE3 

!«iil«iii!i 

4J*j      gjcSqj^jDCgCiPJ      4) 

cans  of  divers 

oo   £>  -fi                    a>    _         '^^^'3^ 

*     *     if                                   ^       §       ft    °                "«      t-       ti 

|    |  f                  |  .§  |  |  ^  c  |   | 

< 

lls^^sai^g^- 

1S4|l24|9lilc 

7, 

a  1  I  1            1  »   §   |   g   §  |   S" 

a=-£Sag-sSa5.25^ 

ojOffOosOPOaj'C-- 

r    s  ""       s       o 

e              a              a 

1 

S      &I^       'o=j      S'C* 

g  s  | 

«  S  a 

•c 

o.    .  o  3   S        i  '3        ".  3  - 

ill 

I 

3     |    M    g    •§            W  "C           |    I    | 

Q. 

i 

•g  |  g  5  ?       11        I  S  •  1 

'o    S  "S 

2  •=   3 

•o 

°t  ^&?s      g  g     r§aa 

B  I  _• 

fo 

•o 

a 

.S5S8»       £l        §        8a 

•S  1  1 

2 

? 

i!i!JiJi  IIIi 

oo    T3     C 

ill 

3 

Purpose 

1  1  1  §  i  §  i  §  fin  - 

E    5    C    co    c     fi  ,  'E     C-          isifaw 

£     £           S        £ 

c 

o                   c                   Jr;1  "3  _r  .2    c 

1  2-s  a 

*     •<-<                                                                    r-        fc»       HOT                              «• 

»    °                             §   S     .              c 

3       = 

=f        •«  N"             o  =  M         o    »"  j/       "c 

(H 
^     H 

«a    ^                                         o     3    ^ 

o           £o                 d    S      "          ^m           ' 

&      <£ 

a 

S     S                                        £     °     s    >            C 

OJ              C 

x           o^                 S          !Z5           C2"           - 

P       0 

1 

fri  .2                     ^  -3  's  S      •* 

H*               •" 

H*      "°  5          •"  ^  5!      i>  >•  H.      ^ 

&<       ^ 
*J       * 

S 

o 
> 

4  1                  a  1  g  «     £ 

&a        fl 
m  ^  ( 

1  x; 

•3 

QJ     'C                                                  _£     *O     (N     Z              "^ 

-«     t*    *c 

•-  i-  J  -3  t-        •-.  ^  ^        ^ol-     : 

s       fs 

^ 

-i*    C                                        ^    4*    ^    ^           Ja 

?,  oi  x 

2  rf  *«  «  d          s  a      j<o~ 

s  •a_« 

c 
1 

.  o        J"05"^         o              s^tdK         c 

about  lol 
T.13N., 

a   •  2  3   r     ^  £  a      §  5  -°   .  1 
s^<»2^       I  *    «      °  *z  u'^  ~- 

pM^«M                "^S^JH^I--' 

—      -         . 

3  |  « 
g  1  S 

z       ?                Z          «  fi                     ^ 

IE 

6            5            &            2 

3 

a 

S1'       ^                — 
aj                        oj 

i 

3 

I 

o3                   ^              M 

», 

•3 

|S2             1         | 

3                          1 

1 

ai 

ilia      1!      \ 

. 

I            I            5            ^ 

w>              fe                                l-j                       •< 

fc                  X                  ^" 

1» 

K       S               S           S 

g              g              g 

22       2                2            S 

QO                            OO                            CO 

»-  o 

«              CO                                0                       CD 

QO"                               irf"                               00 

(N                                                                    rt                                 c 

I! 

—               2                                •—  * 

33                          30) 

^           ^j                         ^O3 

*c 

•                    .                    .                  »c 

1      1      1 

J, 

PS               S           8 

s                                s 

88 

00              00                                CO                       CO 

«                        s 

tt./'S 

i^         ^                     irf"               (d~ 

of                                         od" 

•M                   -.                                          -H                                                                                            _ 

c 

^                    o                    ^                    c 

^ 

>,                                 >»               «                           ^ 

-c 

•o                                       'O 

d  C 

&         fl                     -^                ft 
£        9                   s 

1                                       § 

Q 

<.         -;                     1-1                :c 

>5                                                                             -J 

o 

-     «   /    /   ~ 

eC 

I~                                    QO                                    O>                                    O 

IRRIGATION     INVKSTKiATlONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK. 


167 


"     u           'S*35 

Is  .  £  J  .  « 
§  1  1  s  3  1  1 

—      s  - 

J         S   4 
£       ig  Jj    , 

^Ze'oCS.SPi 

-r'                                    T 

_-.{         oo         dodo              do    do 

3      B  £  &      BO      ft  p  R  w         a  a  a  a 

8"      S  S  * 

55555555    6    o   o   o 

QCQQQQOAC^QQ 

Plf  ; 

i        1:1. 

t                   85  =  5 

1    !  *.  I     i  1     III!       i  i  i 

3,       »  &  £  ^    :    :        •    :    :    •             ... 

miii  in 

1      1     5      ^ 

i       if8!* 

a                  a 

•                             J*f    S 

^                              o   -s"  .2 

«       —  •£  S  *    :    :        :    :    :    : 

J3          S    i    S    «      • 

2       8      e  %    I    !        :    :    :    :            :    :    : 

o   »-   c    a>      . 

I     1  *1|  -i   i       i   i   :   i          :   :   i 

a         oiis         ^"00         oooo               oocc 

t      I  .  S  3  1   :   :      1  '  *  ':         1  "°:  1  ' 
H      a                :    :        :    :    :    :            :    :    :    : 

a      j<  s«  'S        :    '        :::-ci        ::: 
J       S  .2  S        :    :        :    :    :  g  3        :    :    : 
^       1  S  _-       :    :        :    i    i  5  ^  „•    :    :    : 
g      a  -  *       ••       :   :    :  fi  9  3   :   !   i 

ooooocooocco 
•e-C'C'O'C'c'C'C'O'OTS'o 

1              ||  | 
1              '-  1  f  . 

I         I!; 
f         til 

•o      fll       ;:       i   i   i  1  f  i   i   :   i 

S       a  =  g        ::        :    :    :  s  %  a    :    :    : 
a       .2,38        ::        :    '•    :  1  I  1    i    i 

•2       _-  a  8    .    :    :        :    :    :  S  2  g    :    :    : 

|   I  ,-  j  I  i  i     i  i  i  1  1  1  j  j  i 
5-   1  1  1  1     :          1  ,-  tf  i  i  i 

-x       fc3§S.        '                   ^£*::: 

S         1'^     " 

S    —     of   •£     =J     £     °     °              "OCof^i<5®®!: 

M            OH                                                                           ft* 

o    o'    o    o    c    o    o    o'    o    o    d   d 

I         ! 

§              s 

:       g  *te          1                                :    :    : 
1      -i-           fe                               :    :    : 

i  i        | 

S       £  «  «           *                                 :    :    : 

i      a  ^  »r     a£        s     a         :s;a 

6      ^.&S      3  S   -^  III          |l|2 

:  a    :S    is    is    is    is 

E2E2E2E2»|SE2 

-  -0             J                 5 
I  *             J  *             2 

?      i^H-     i  |     '^s^s         ^a^s 

^           I    r    ".           fc    b    S3  <£&<$%                ^iJjs'i 
.               5     9     Q            —     O     *"      ?    •"  •     to    ^-                     M^^KI—  • 

5            fi  5     8             k^OCit»^                     bc>5jD> 

S         .SP*»         oS'C'Co'Eo              "Co  'Co 
^        aj                  fee        w&nCS^             O&H^fe 

3||l|lfla|ai 

-*•     t.      s?    b      i*     t-      i*     t.      ''^    fc.     S*.     t. 
iS9^OiSoAv«VAO 

x     —      -J.    —      X    ^3      =c    ^     tfi    ,Z      K    —  i 

"SSPS^fSSS^s^s 

CoEoTloEoEo'Co 
SfiOSOfioSoSoS 

s 

1                   1 
S                   | 

o                   m 
u                   *•» 

1        1                        £             |        1                   1        ,. 
pq        S                   o*»;'        oSoW              ogo^ 

B      *:                 -'          J      H              ^      ^ 

U           ^                                CJ3                  <           <i                         -4           -s 

S       S        :       1        is 

OQo35oco>-.  oSo^ 

ta      ^      ^      S      J.      i5S 

"-;      fa      d      as      d      -^ 

1           1 

i    1           111        11 

1     1     1     1     1     i 

*           "           £ 

93                                         0] 

s               a 

o^                   o              o^o2"1              o1"1©^- 
•c         2                  '°*j'o.'O'             ro.ro 
;          3                            £*              "S          v                      a)          c 

•tiT          oo"          t-T          i>"          ^          to" 

o^o         o^o         o         o 

rQ        OT3        5i'°.'0        cj'0^'0        ^ 

.              3               3               U               4>               a3               O« 

i               1 

II             111          11 

^               SB" 

^                M               ' 

& 

S                    0S         o^o^               o^o^- 

t>*            g                                     £J>                   *JO                           «             * 

S         ^                           •<               0         Q                     £         •< 

oT         to"         eo"                 1    of         oo" 

o         o         o         o         '   w   O  ™ 

•Trr"iTi 

S       S  S  g  S 


168 


IRRIGATION    INVKSTIGATFONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


J   a 

x              '   a 

''•    •',   —                        «    a 

a        'S    * 

i 

I  ^ 

S  *^* 

-~    -"                             —    t. 
;;    z    -T                            o    a)      . 

f 
t 
~ 

|    .  |  §. 

3 

S"     K 

^         $  2 

«  "O    2                          os| 

C 

3  I  a  a 

c 

If* 

a    » 

S     .         |  1    o 

file           111 

!r 

c 

1  Eli 

s 

»  5  s                °  S  -d 

7    -r    c    *- 

o 

•a    ffi         c 

8  o  S       f 

C 
fi 

go        s   «   s       c 

i  s  ?  i       ill     <= 

s  s  a 

1  1    IIS 

S             3 

g"  p,  s  p,           g"  a  4 

\ 

•  s  '  s  °  " 

*  5  « 

•a               «  3    >« 

-g    a                                 o>    a)    a;    a> 

rr*,     r;    i^      CJ 

1 

*c  *s  > 

S   S   a 

O      &     V 

I      ??l 

g  §               4  ^  s  t- 

S  1  8  8 

r    o 

g 

V     O            ? 
—     0)     0     « 

"8            -S   S   o  'S 

*  p§                         "3  Ji   ri"  "H 

«2J  "S  "3  -^ 

1 

o 

I 

o 

Dam  and  canal  30 
on  top,  7  feet  d 
fall  sufficient  I 
the  water  clain 

rtn 

^ 

6  1      3  ^  |  s 

'&    a       'a    °*  ^    tt 
II        jfll" 

ill      l!li 

"  ~  8                  s  I  c  c 

s  s  ^              as 

111       iifl!1 

5                         o 

c 

t 

|Li 

»  1  1  i 

*  S     .  1  .4 

c    *  1  21 
§  S  £  =   =   c 

Jg^l* 

rj 

I 

1 

•|i 

j      i  § 

11 

I 

n 

Ifl 

1      »1 

*        «  a 

a            •*   &    • 

1 

•~< 

a 

o  o  a 

*-           111 

3  S  "d 

3 

€ 
fe 

intended  ; 

'^     od     S3 

BS     «i-j       H 

i  i  s 

§    *    t3 

S  a  i 

T3      _  _. 

I          S3  § 
a            0-  |   a 

a        1  •g  a 
i        a  §  § 

1                         1 

a                a 
1                f 

«"  |  a 

a    §    S 

o    a  « 

•a 

>| 

0 

^  2   S 

S           *       a 

o                              S 

*O          c 

"3 

$ 

if  5  I       c 

~. 

"S             -  "3  _-       c 

1                     2               c 

c 

-  "3 

jii 

jj, 

fl)     .—  •      CO              -^ 

"T 

.2             >c    E  -3        •? 

!>                   I             * 

•c 

a  5  "3           " 

1 

1 

i 

i?      I3- 

£                     S 

S  ^  « 

•8 

S  a 

ig«^.g^         Jj^fl 

^ 

M 

o           ; 

I 

1 

•g  a 

£fs-S|5      sB^Sl 

£ 

e     ; 

1 

~  1 

i'«i^l^rfiS«S 

s 

_§  ji  i 

1 

.£ 

E 

0  £     a' 

G«|Jrt5§™'Sa      « 

V 

i  3  a 

a 

3 

*o 

«                 1 
B               = 

i 

1|     1           1 

i|-»"i||l  ^ia|? 

^ 
p 

."81            1 

^> 

*c: 

c 

2             i 

5 

4-1         0)                        S                                                  ^ 

oa2*|-gtf«     r1^ 

8 

a  ?  a              a 

a 

e 

o 

i 

1'             -s 
1             ! 

0                    fc 

I 
i 

o 

fill      i 

0              fc.                    C 

.          ootj    C-^M     C    c^'i^'c''^ 

g«cc«             s^Mufco 

I 

k   9   ti                        >• 

*lj          1 

CL,                                 ® 

fc 

J 

3 

; 

'• 

5 

a 

[ 

• 

S 

a 

« 

£ 

; 

M 

'3 

a 

E 

! 

•§ 

"3 

o3 

1          •& 

•o                 .             sj 

~ 

o 

JS 

"o 

0> 

| 

1 

| 

| 

1 

J2                     cf 

S                     c 

^ 

s        ^           •§ 

"*                             rf 

a, 

^                      ' 

^                     i- 

S=           d 

w                       >-; 

x 

"J 

£  ° 

1                     1 

1           1 

i             i         i 

3 

i 

8f 

•g  C 
S  » 
"5 

0. 

£.                  = 

•§ 

I          I               4 

co"                                          t^"                             T 
S                                           S                             ? 

i                i            g 

S 

S                ' 

<                  ^ 

i-.           < 

CO                                               X                                 ^ 

" 

S 

If 

*>               S 

C 

a"       a1          0 

a"                  s"             ? 

s 

I 

o>  ^ 

^                        > 

(  *C 

>>       >»          *'• 

*4                                     >                          - 

0?                                       ' 

3- 

«                  = 

?.            ? 

3           3 

1                  g             1 

1 

3 

0 

m                       y. 

? 

*  -  .    *               ? 

5                            S                   § 

!» 

S                         S 

IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK. 


3  a 

£  =  - 

S    S  o 

~   S  .S 


%  B  -9  |       o 

S 

i 

- 

1?  i 

8 

af    a>    o    t- 

«    --  A 

1  I  a  3 

"     •/.     —     ?* 

of  If 

=  1!  f 

*    1   -r 

»    •  «  7 

*iii 

HI  if. 

^    3    *"     0)     0>    *^ 

C 

~ 

* 

~ 

i  i  ?  t 

o 

S  £  a 

"1=3 

"S  4^"  .£    S 

g 

1 

i 

•3  a   9   » 

ji     O       '   *O 

IllI 
If  11 

sill 

t-                                     C 

a)                         t^ 

i 

_c 

' 

c 
— 

ft  «  "I  •§ 

llll 

r  .M    o 

s;ii 

*•  5  j  ^ 

to          O 

x!  3  s  s 

CO     ^     .2       « 

»   <»    ° 

*  S| 

s  |  § 

AS"  c   2   ° 

H    8  -g 

.•   ^    3i    a>          - 

: 

! 

c 

_-    £*      Oi     CJ 

I  §  *  ° 

S    *.    S    <5 

S  * 

i 

J 

bo 

1 

9 

S         - 

c 
i 

C 

- 

c 
^ 

'H 

C 

. 

w 

o 

1            ; 

1 

|| 

Q 

- 

J 

I- 

11 

s              § 

s  ? 

;  - 

!  c 

1  S 

^                                t 

•<                  c 

11 

)      9 

; 

II 

1           1 

.  i 

1      3 

s  s 

/ 

IS 

|| 

a              E 

i     r 
1      7 

-    - 

4     C 

f     C 

i 

'  8 

I             I 

5e 

N 

?; 

II 

S                  s 

S  : 

5  S 

170  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

These  tables  do  not  include  any  of  the  filings  on  the  tributaries.  After  the 
filings  are  found  in  the  records  there  is  no  means  of  determining  which  of  the  claims 
have  been  perfected  by  the  construction  of  works  and  the  use  of  water.  They  all 
appear  on  the  record  as  of  equal  force.  The  only  way  to  determine  definitely  which 
of  the  appropriations  have  been  used  is  by  a  careful  survey  and  inspection  of  the 
stream  and  each  of  its  tributaries  from  which  water  is  claimed  from  their  sources  to 
where  Cache  Creek  loses  itself  in  Sacramento  Slough.  In  so  doing  we  discover  that 
most  of  the  claims  ended  with  the  posting  and  filing.  Only  three  of  the  claimants 
ever  attempted  to  construct  works,  and  only  those  of  the  Yolo  orchard  are  now  in  use. 
Of  the  recorded  claims  to  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek,  in  Lake  County,  not  one 
advanced  beyond  the  stage  of  filing.  There  is  a  curious  sameness  of  thought  and 
language  in  the  tilings  at  Grigsby  Riffle  and  Fowler  Mill,  which  would  indicate  that 
it  was  the  same  moving  spirit  that  brought  about  all  these  filings,  and  that  the  solo. 
purpose  was  to  shut  out  and  deter  Any  who  might,  in  good  faith,  seek  to  appropriate. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  find  many  appropriations  of  which  there  is  no  record. 
The  appropriators  have  never  made  filings  and  have  been  fortunate  enough  or  insignifi- 
cant enough  to  keep  out  of  court.  The  California  courts  have  held  that  the  failure 
to  file  a  claim  does  not  in  any  way  impair  the  right,  except  that  the  appropriation 
dates  from  the  beginning  of  the  work  instead  of  from  the  date  of  posting  notice. 
The  extent  of  these  unrecorded  appropriations  can  be  determined  only  by  careful 
survey  of  the  lands  irrigated  and  an  inspection  of  the  works  used  for  diversion. 
There  are  64  recorded  claims  for  water  from  Cache  Creek.  Forty-six  of  these  are 
for  water  delivered  under  a  4-inch  pressure.  The  total  aggregate  of  these  46  claims 
is  2,230,000  inches.  One  claims  20,000  miner's  inches;  another,  600  cubic  feet  per 
second;  a  third,  5,000,000  inches  per  second.  Four  other  claims  are  for  cubic  inches 
of  water  used  under  a  4-inch  pressure.  The  aggregate  of  these  four  claims  is  2,100,000 
of  the  kind  of  unit  described,  whatever  that  may  mean.  Another  wants  4,460,544,000 
cubic  feet  and  water  for  evaporation.  Not  counting  the  2, 100,000  cubic  inches  under 
a  4-inch  pressure  and  the  "4,460, 544, 000  cubic  feet  and  water  for  evaporation,"  there 
remains  an  aggregate  of  7,380,000  inches,  equal  to  147,600  cubic  feet  per  second. 
For  all  this  array  of  filings  and  figures  there  is  in  operation  under  these  claims  one 
lone  pumping  plant  using  8  cubic  feet  per  second.  As  against  the  one  party  with  the 
regular  filing,  who  uses  water  from  Cache  Creek,  there  are  thirteen  persons  using 
water  without  filing.  The  fact  that  they  are  below  the  Moore  Ditch  and  content  them- 
selves with  what  escapes  diversion  at  the  dam  has  thus  far  enabled  them  to  avoid 
trouble.  Under  the  present  system  it  is  only  a  question  of  time  when  controversy 
will  arise  and  all  these  rights  will  have  to  get  into  court.  Trouble  is  inevitable. 

Want  of  space  forbids  the  publishing  of  the  abstract  of  filings  on  the  tributaries 
of  Cache  Creek  and  Clear  Lake.  They  are  of  the  same  general  character  as  those  on 
Cache  Creek  and  many  of  them  equally  absurd.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  out  of  49 
claims  on  record  5  are  in  use  on  areas  ranging  from  2  to  30  acres.  Double  this  num- 
ber are  using  the  water  without  filing.  The  records  in  these  counties  are  not  excep- 
tional. In  every  county  in  California  which  I  have  had  occasion  to  investigate  and 
in  every  other  State  where  this  system  of  posting  and  filing  prevails,  the  same 
conditions  hold.  Anything  more  ineffectual  and  misleading  than  such  a  record  would 
be  difficult  to  conceive. 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  171 

The  supply  of  water  in  most  of  the  Lake  County  streams  at  the  season  when 
irrigation  is  needed  is  precarious,  and  the  areas  irrigated  are.  small.  Scotts  Creek 
is  an  exception.  Here  the.  flow,  though  not  large,  is  more  constant,  and  irrigation  is 
possible  at  times  when  it  is  most  needed.  There  are  also  several  artesian  wells  in  this 
valley,  and  small  areas  are  irrigated  from  this  supply.  Unless  storage  facilities  can 
be  secured  on  the  upper  reaches  of  the  mountain  streams,  the  area  irrigated  in  this 
county  is  not  likely  to  be  greatly  enlarged.  Even  with  storage,  the  amount  of  water 
that  can  be  utilized  in  this  region  is  small  compared  with  the  whole  supply  in  Clear 
Lake  and  Cache  Creek,  and  there  can  be  no  controversy  with  the  users  below. 
What  the  opportunities  for  such  storage  may  be  I  had  no  opportunity  to  investigate. 

IRRIGATION  FROM  CACHE  CREEK. 

The  first  irrigation  from  Cache  Creek  was  undertaken  by  James  Moore  in  1856. 
Before  beginning  work  on  his  canal  Moore  purchased  850  acres  of  land  covering  the 
point  of  diversion  from  William  Gordon,  also  the  right  of  way  for  the,  ditch  through 
the  Gordon  grant.  Gordon  delivered  to  Moore  a  bond  for  a  deed  for  850  acres  of 
the  Gordon  grant,  "together  with  the  entire  and  exclusive  right  to  build  and  erect 
and  keep  in  repair  a  dam  across  Cache  Creek  and  the  entire  and  exclusive 

right  to  use  the  waters  of  the  aforesaid  'Jesus  Maria'  or  Cache  Creek  running 
through  said  Gordon's  grant,  to  the  sole  use  and  behoof  of  the  said  James  Moore, 
his  heirs  and  assigns  forever."  A  deed  was  later  executed,  in  accordance  with  the 
terms  of  the  bond,  to  F.  W.  Fratt,  Moore's  assignee,  and  the  property  was  by  him 
afterwards  deeded  to  Moore. 

This  transfer  has  an  important  bearing  on  the  subsequent  history  of  Yolo 
County  and  is  worthy  of  some  attention. 

In  this  bond  Gordon  assumes  to  fix  the  title  to  the  water  of  Cache  Creek  in 
Moore.  In  order  to  find  the  ground  for  Gordon's  assumed  right  to  deed  away  Cache 
Creek  I  have  made  a  careful  examination  of  all  the  papers  on  file  bearing  Gordon's 
title.  Gordon's  deed  came  direct  from  the  Mexican  governor,  General  Micheltorena. 
It  reads  as  follows: 

Manuel  Micheltorena,  governor,  commanding  general,  inspector  of  the  department  of  both 
Californias: 

Whereas  William  Gordon,  a  naturalized  Mexican,  has  made  application,  for  his  personal  benefit 
and  that  of  his  family,  for  a  tract  of  land  in  Sanoma  between  Sierra  of  Napa  and  the  river  Sacramento, 
the  steps  and  inquiries  concerning  it  being  previously  made,  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  laws 
and  regulations,  using  the  authority  which  is  conferred  upon  me,  in  the  name  of  the  Mexican  nstion, 
I  have  conceded  to  him  a  part  of  the  land  mentioned,  declaring  to  him  the  ownership  of  it  by  these 
presents  letters  subjecting  it  to  the  approbation  of  the  most  excellent  departmental  assembly,  and 
under  the  following  conditions: 

(1)  He  may  inclose  it  without  prejudice  to  crossings,  roads,  and  servitudes;  he  may  enjoy  it 
freely  and  exclusively,  appropriating  it  to  the  use  which  best  suits  him,  but  within  a  year  he  shall 
build  a  house  and  it  shall  be  inhabited. 

(2)  When  the  ownership  of  it  shall  be  confirmed  to  him,  he  shall  solicit  the  proper  judge  that  he 
may  give  him  judicial  possession  in  virtue  of  this  title;  by  whom  the  boundaries  shall  be  marked  out, 
in  the  limits  of  which  he  shall  place  corner  posts  and  some  fruit  or  forest  trees  of  some  use. 

(3)  The  land  of  which  mention  is  made  is  of  2  square  leagues  within  the  bounds  as  represented 
by  the  map  which  is  annexed  to  the  respective  expedient.     The  judge  who  shall  give  the  possession 


172  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

shall  cause  it  to  be  measured  conformably  to  the  ordinance,  leaving  the  overplus  to  the  nation  for 
proper  uses. 

If  he  contravenes  these  conditions  he  shall  lose  his  right  to  the  land  and  it  shall  be  denounceable 
by  another. 

Wherefore  I  order  that,  this  present  title  being  held  as  firm  and  valid,  entry  be  made  of  it  in  the 
book  to  which  it  belongs,  and  it  is  to  be  delivered  to  the  interested  person  for  his  security  and  other 
ends. 

Given  in  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  on  the  27th  of  January,  1843. 

MAN'L  MICHELTORENA. 

MAN'S  ISIRENO,  Secretary.  „ 

(Translation  certified  by  George  Fisher,  secretary.) 

When  we  remember  that  the  Mexican  Government  has  never  at  any  time  in  its 
history  recognized  the  doctrine  of  exclusive  riparian  ownership  in  water,  and  has 
always  insisted  on  the  right  of  citizens  and  communities  to  appropriate  water  for 
beneficial  use  under  proper  regulations,  the  presumption  involved  in  the  making  and 
accepting  of  the  Gordon-Moore  deed  is  stupendous. 

In  1860,  after  the  necessary  steps  had  been  taken  toward  quieting  title  to  these 
Mexican  grants,  the  United  States  Government  issued  a  patent  for  the  Gordon  grant. 
This  patent,  after  reciting  the  necessary  land  descriptions,  confirms  the  grant  to 
Gordon  in  terms  as  follows: 

Know  ye:  That  the  United  States  of  America,  in  consideration  of  the  premises  and  pursuant  to 
the  provisions  of  the  act  of  Congress  aforesaid  of  March  3,  1851,  have  given  and  granted,  and  by  these 
presents  give  and  grant  unto  William  Gordon,  and  to  his  heirs,  the  tract  of  land  embraced  and 
described  in  the  foregoing  survey,  but  with  the  stipulation,  that  in  virtue  of  the  fifteenth  section  of 
said  act  the  confirmation  of  this  said  claim  and  this  patent  "shall  not  affect  the  interests  of  third 
persons."  To  have  and  to  hold  the  said  tract  with  the  appurtenances  unto  the  said  William  Gordon 
and  to  his  heirs  and  assigns  forever  with  the  stipulation  aforesaid. 
•  In  testimony  whereof,  etc. 

By  the  President: 

JAMES  BUCHANAN. 

WASHINGTON,  February  4,  1860. 

What  exclusive  rights  this  patent  or  the  Mexican  deed  conveyed  is  not  apparent. 

Moore  also  bought  from  one  Thomas  Harbin,  at  that  time  the  principal  owner  of 
the  Hardy  grant,  200  acres  of  land  lying  along  Cache  Creek  and  the  right  of  way 
for  his  ditch  across  a  portion  of  Harbin's  other  lands.  The  clause  of  Harbin's  deed 
to  Moore  referring  to  the  right  of  way  was  later  made  the  basis  of  a  claim  on  the 
part  of  Moore  that  he  had  purchased  all  riparian  rights  on  Cache  Creek  below 
the  head  of  his  ditch;  and,  as  it  will  be  necessary  to  refer  to  this  later,  Ihe  clause  is 
here  quoted: 

And  the  said  party  of  the  first  part  (Harbin)  for  the  consideration  aforesaid  further  grants, 
bargains,  and  sells  and  aliens  and  conveys  unto  the  said  party  of  the  second  part  (Moore),  his  heirs 
and  assigns  forever,  the  right,  title,  and  privilege  of  bringing  water  to  the  said  tract  or  parcel  of  land 
(the  200  acres  purchased)  by  means  of  a  canal  or  ditch  from  Cache  Creek  over  and  across  any  lands  or 
real  estate  owned,  sold,  or  claimed  by  said  party  of  the  first  part,  and  situated  between  the  tract 
or  parcel  of  land  and  real  estate  aforesaid,  and  a  certain  other  tract  or  parcel  of  land  claimed  and 
owned  by  said  party  of  the  second  part  under  an  agreement  of  purchase  from  one  William  Gordon. 

This  on  its  face  is  a  deed  to  right  of  way  across  the  Harbin  lands  lying  between 
the  tract  purchased  from  Gordon  and  the  tract  conveyed  in  the  preceding  clauses  of 
this  deed.  But  the  wording  is  ambiguous,  and  it  may  bo  that  Harbin  intended  to 
give  a  right  to  water  for  200  acres  which  should  take  precedence  over  the  rights 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CRKKK.  173 

attaching  to  his  other  riparian  lands.  Beyond  this  there  is  nothing  in  the  deed  to 
indicate  that  Harbin  understood  that  he  was  transferring  the  right  to  water  lands  not 
riparian  or  that  can  reasonably  be  considered  us  alienating  all  riparian  rights  from 
Harbin's  other  lands  lying  along  Cache  Creek. 

From  this  time  forward  Moore  claimed  exclusive  ownership  in  the  waters  of 
Cache  Creek  and  held  himself  in  readiness  to  defend  it  against  all  comers. 

In  1850  work  was  begun.  A  temporary  dam  of  brush  and  gravel  was  made,  and 
the  headgate  and  a  short  section  of  the  ditch  was  constructed  of  capacity  sufficient 
to  carry  a  considerable  volume  of  water.  The  ditch  was  extended  some  3£  miles  to 
some  lands  owned  by  Moore,  but  the  canal,  except  for  a  part  of  the  first  mile,  was 
much  reduced  in  size.  Only  -A  small  tract  was  watered.  In  the  voluminous  testimony 
concerning  the  ditch  evidence  as  to  the  actual  use  of  the  water  is  conspicuously  absent, 
but,  as  nearly  as  can  be  determined  from  the  conflicting  evidence  given  in  the  various 
suits  over  this  claim,  the  volume  actually  diverted  and  used  prior  to  1864  never 
exceeded  2.5  cubic  feet  per  second.  In  1864  the  ditch  was  enlarged  and  extended 
and  the  grade  of  the  section  at  the  head  changed  to  secure  greater  capacity.  The 
ditch  was  also  extended  in  two  branches — one  toward  Woodland,  the  other  southward. 
The  total  length  of  the  canal  and  main  branches  at  the  close  of  this  work  in  1864  was 
about  9  miles. 

The  Moore  Ditch  of  to-day  has  substantially  the  same  extent  as  in  1864.  Exten- 
sions and  laterals  have  been  built  by  the  users  of  the  water,  but  these  are  owned  and 
maintained  by  the  parties  who  have  constructed  them.  Some  of  these  extensions  are 
made  by  individuals,  others  by  organized  companies  of  farmers.  The  most  important 
of  these  organizations  are  the  South  Fork  Water  Ditch  Company  and  the  Farmers 
Irrigating  Ditch  Company.  The  ditch  of  the  first-named  company  was  built  in  1864 
and  has  a  capacity  of  about  40  cubic  feet  per  second.  It  covers  about  2,000  acres  of 
fine  lands,  but  now  irrigates  on\y  about  1,000  acres.  The  original  cost  of  this  ditch 
was  about  $2,400,  mostly  in  labor.  The  Farmers  Irrigating  Ditch  Company  also 
built  its  canal  in  1864,  which  has  a  capacity  of  about  20  cubic  feet  per  second.  It 
covers  about  1,000  acres  and  cost  originally  about  $1,500.  The  total  length  of  the 
Moore  Ditch  and  the  extensions  and  laterals  is  estimated  at  about  70  miles,  but  this 
probably  includes  some  of  the  smaller  field  laterals.  There  are  approximately  30,000 
acres  of  fine  land  that  could  be  watered  from  this  ditch  and  its  extensions  if  the  ditch 
could  supply^  the  watei-. 

The  ditch  was  operated  for  many  years  with  temporary  dams,  which  were  usually 
carried  out  during  the  winter  rains.  In  1881  a  more  permanent  dam  was  put  in. 
This  remained  until  1886  when,  owing  to  defective  construction  or  neglect  of  repairs, 
it  was  washed  out.  Since  the  dam  went  out  it  has  been  replaced  each  year  by  a 
temporary  structure  of  brush  and  gravel,  which  disappears  with  the  first  heavy  rains 
and  can  not  be  replaced  in  the  spring  until  all  danger  of  flood  is  passed.  Once  or 
twice,  when  the  owners  of  the  land  have  been  especially  desirous  of  obtaining  water, 
they  have  secured  the  building  of  the  dam  a  little  earlier  in  the  season  by  giving 
bond  for  the  cost  of  the  dam  in  case  it  should  be  washed  out.  The  water  users  feel 
that  this  is  a  one-sided  arrangement  and  generally  await  the  action  of  the  ditch 
owners.  One  of  the  views  in  Plate  XV  shows  the  character  of  the  construction  of 
the  dam  for  the  present  season.  As  it  is  not  expected  to  withstand  floods,  it  is,  of 


174  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

course,  made  as  slight  and  inexpensive  us  possible.  This  operates  to  prevent  the  use 
of  the  water  in  the  season  when  it  is  abundant  and  when  its  use  on  orchards,  vine- 
yards, and  alfalfa_  would  be  most  beneficial.  During  the  cool  weather,  when  the  trees 
and  vines  are  dormant,  it  is  possible  to  water  much  more  thoroughly  and  to  greater 
depths  than  is  safe  in  the  heat  of  summer.  The  water  applied  at  this  time  reaches 
the  deeper  roots  and,  stored  in  the  subsoil,  furnishes  a  reserve  of  moisture  for 
summer  supply.  Under  such  conditions  much  less  water  and  shorter  irrigating 
periods  suffice  for  keeping  everything  in  full  vigor  during  the  growing  and  fruiting 
season.  In  winter  the  low  temperature  is  also  less  favorable  for  evaporation,  and 
hurtful  salts  are  much  less  likely  to  be  brought  to  the  surface  than  in  summer.  The 
applying  of  water  during  the  hot  season,  especially  if  the  earth  is  dry  to  a  great 
depth  and  the  application  long  continued,  is  always  attended  with  risk  of  baking  the 
soil  and  scalding  the  growing  crops,  and  it  is  desirable  that  the  irrigating  periods  of 
this  season  be  as  infrequent  and  as  short  as  possible  while  furnishing  the  necessarv 
moisture  for  vigorous  and  healthy  plant  growth.  Another  advantage  of  winter  irri- 
gation is  that  the  lands  may  thus  be  cleared  of  gophers.  In  places  where  water  is 
near  the  surface,  say  at  depths  of  5  to  8  feet,  with  a  favorable  season  for  seeding, 
alfalfa  will  grow,  and  after  the  first  season  would  thrive  without  irrigation  were  :t 
not  for  these  animals.  These  burrow  in  the  alfalfa  fields  and  feed  on  the  roots.  If 
allowed  to  have  their  way  they,  in  a  few  years,  kill  out  the  alfalfa.  When  the  fields 
are  flooded  with  cold  water  in  winter  the  gopher  is  either  drowned,  or  driven  out, 
chilled  and  drenched,  to  perish  in  the  cold.  When  driven  out  by  summer  irrigation 
he  makes  his  way  to  the  nearest  bank  and  waits  for  the  sun  to  dry  his  coat  and  for 
the  water  to  recede.  He  is  soon  no  worse  for  his  bath,  and  the  irrigated  land  is  the 
better  fitted  for  his  operations.  When  land  i.s  regularly  watered  in  winter  there  is 
practically  no  trouble  with  this  pest.  But  without  this  the  gopher  has  undisputed 
possession  and  soon  makes  reseeding  necessary.  The  consequent  loss  and  expense 
deters  many  from  the  cultivation  of  this  crop.  Wherever  winter  irrigation  has  been 
practiced  in  this  region  the  results  have  been  approved. 

The  Moore  Ditch  has  not  been  cleared  out  or  adequately  repaired  for  many 
years,  and  is  choked  with  moss  and  other  vegetable  growth  to  such  an  extent  that  its 
capacity  is  very  much  reduced.  Plate  XV  shows  its  present  condition. 

For  the  purpose  of  finding  the  character  of  the  service  rendered,  a  series  of 
questions  was  sent  to  each  person  who  was  supposed  to  be  using  water  under  this 
ditch.  The  information  thus  gathered  shows  that  the  water  is  not  received  at  the 
time,  and  in  the  volume  needed  to  secure  the  best  results.  Out  of  forty-seven  persons 
replying  to  the  questions:  "Have  you  had  water  from  the  ditch  to  the  amount  needed 
and  at  the  time  -needed ?"  forty-three  answered  "No,"  and  four  answered  "Yes."' 
And  in  response  to  the  request,  "State  the  length  of  time  .you  waited  after  you 
heeded  or  asked  for  the  water,"  forty-six  of  the  forty-seven  gave  answers  as  follows: 

"Had  all  the  water  wanted  at  all  times,"  "A  few  hours,"  "Did  not  have  to  wait 
long  in  1900,"  "Ten  days,"  "Fourteen  days,"  "  Sometimes  have  to  wait,"  " Sometimes 
as  long  as  two  weeks,"  "Fifteen  days,"  "One  to  three  weeks."  "Twenty  days." 
"  About  three,  weeks  after  it  was  needed,"  "  Three  weeks,"  "  One  week  to  one  month," 
"Two  to  four  weeks,"  "About  three  weeks."  ••Sometimes  we  have  to  wait  three  to 
four  weeks,"  "Three  to  four  weeks,"  "Always  have  to  wait  in  August  and  September." 


U-  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  o'  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XV. 


COUNTY, 

L  » 

CALIFORNIA. 


! 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  175 

"The  brush  dam  was  put  in  late  and  everybody  wanted  the  water  before  it  was 
ready,"  "Three  to  four  weeks,"  "About  four  weeks,"  "Four  weeks,"  "Thirty  days," 
"Sometimes  wait  a  month  or  more,"  "About  one  month,"  "One  month,"  "From 
April  until  June,"  "One  to  five  weeks,"  "Thirty  to  forty  days,"  "Anywhere  from 
one  to  six  weeks,"  "Six  weeks,"  "Six  weeks,"  "Three  to  six  weeks,"  "Four  to  six 
weeks,"  "Five  to  six  weeks,"  "One  and  one-half  months,"  "One  to  eight  weeks," 
"One  to  three  months,"  "One  to  six  months,"  "Long  enough  to  lose  one  crop  of 
alfalfa  each  year,"  "Got  none,"  "There  is  no  regularity  about  it,"  "We  wait  until 
the  water  happens  to  come  our  way  and  take  what  we  can  get,"  "Are  still  waiting, 
and  are  liable  to,"  "This  year  my  crop  was  half  grown  when  I  got  water,"  "Have 
not  had  a  thorough  or  satisfactory  irrigation  for  three  years,"  "We  are  unable  to  get 
a  supply  of  water  at  any  time." 

If  this  failure  to  supply  water  was  confined  to  August  and  September,  when  there 
is  little  water  in  the  stream,  it  might  be  excused,  but  it  is  not.  On  June  30,  when  the 
ditch  was  taking  60.52  cubic  feet  per  second,  75.88  cubic  feet  per  second  was  passing 
the  headgatc  down  Cache  Creek.  The  larger  part  of  this  was  wasted  in  the  swamp. 
This  was  at  a  time  when  water  was  much  needed  and  the  demand  much  in  excess  of 
the  volume  which  could  bo  supplied  by  the  ditch.  As  this  ditch  is  managed,  water 
can  not  be  used  except  in  the  season  when  the  supply  and  the  capacity  of  the  ditch  is 
least  and  the  demand  for  the  water  greatest. 

Surprising  as  is  the  condition  of  affairs  set  forth  in  the  answers  of  the  water  users, 
one  does  not  ha\ve  to  look  far  for  the  cause.  If  water  is  private  property,  the  canal 
owner  may  do  what  he  will  with  his  own,  and  he  may  serve  or  neglect  his  customers 
as  suits  his  convenience  or  inclination.  The  only  thing  that  can  change  the  situation 
and  reform  this  service  is  the  recognition  of  the  broader  principle,  which  sooner  or 
later  must  apply  in  every  arid  country,  that  water  is  public  property  and  the  ditch 
owner  a  public  servant,  and  that  the  right  to  take  water  from  a  stream  carries  with 
it  the  obligation  of  impartial  and  adequate  service  to  the  water  users.  The  extent  of 
the  right  must  be  the  measure  of  the  obligation. 

If  the  taking  of  water  from  a  stream  and  the  protection  of  the  rights  alreadj' 
vested  is  not  a  matter  of  public  interest,  it  follows  that  each  appropriate!'  must  protect 
his  own  interests,  and  the  litigation  must  go  on  in  an  ever-increasing  ratio.  So  long 
as  the  rights  of  the  owners  of  the  Moore  Ditch  are  neither  defined  nor  protected,  so 
long  must  they  be  in  conflict  with  every  new  appropriate!'.  They  can  not  evade  the 
contest.  These  people  are  not  more  contentious  than  others.  The  elder  Moore  was 
an  enterprising,  public-spirited  man.  His  successors  are  good  neighbors  and  respected 
citizens.  The  chief  responsibility  for  the  present  deplorable  situation  does  not  rest 
with  the  canal  owners.  They,  along  with  the  people  of  the  valley,  are  the  victims  of 
a  bad  system,  founded  on  the  false  principle  of  private  ownership  of  water. 

Acting  under  the  statute  of  California  the  board  of  supervisors  of  Yolo  County 
have  attempted  to  fix  the  rates  to  be  charged  and  the  method  of  measurement  under 
the  Moore  Ditch.  The  ordinance  reads  as  follows: 

The  board  of  supervisors  of  the  county  of  Yolo,  State  of  California,  do  ordain  as  follows: 
SECTION  1.     The  maximum  rate  at  which  the  owners  of  the  Moore  or  Woodland  Ditch  shall  sell 
and  distribute  for  irrigation  purposes  the  water  appropriated  by  such  owners  and  distributed  by  means 
of  such  ditch  is  hereby  fixed  at  the  sum  of  $4  per  foot  for  the  period  of  twenty-four  hours,  with  the 
water  flowing  at  the  rate  of  2  feet  per  second. 


176  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

SEC.  2.  The  measurement  of  said  water  shall  he  ma.de  at  the  bulkhead  in  said  ditch  nearest  to 
the  place  of  actual  use;  provided,  that  where  water  is  furnished  through  branch  ditches  not  owned  by 
the  owners  of  said  Moore  Ditch,  the  measurement  shall  be  at  the  bulkhead  connecting  the  branch  diteh 
with  the  said  Moore  Diteh.  The  measurements  shall  be  made  from  the  top  of  a  weir  four  inches  high, 
constructed  in  the  bottom  of  the  bulkheads  where  measurement  is  made,  and  over  which  weirs  such 
water  must  flow. 

SEC.  3.  The  patrons  of  said  Moore  Ditch  shall  be  permitted  to  permanently  tix  in  and  affix  to  the 
bulkheads,  where  measurement  is  made,  graduated  scales,  marked  off  into  feet  and  inches,  by  means 
of  which  the  depth  of  water  flowing  over  the  weirs  therein  can  be  detected  at  a  glance. 

The  attempt  to  fix  a  unit  of  measurement  is  unfortunate.  If  the  bulkhead  or 
flume  in  the  head  of  the  branch  ditch  and  the  branch  below  the  weir  could  be  so 
arranged  that  the  water  would  always  pass  at  the  rate  of  2  feet  per  second,  the  unit 
"foot"  prescribed  in  the  first  paragraph  might  be  interpreted  to  mean  2  cubic  feet 
per  second,  but  how,  with  the  varying  heads  in  the  main  ditch  and  the  differences  in 
the  grades  of  the  branch  ditches,  this  velocity  of  2  feet  per  second  is  to  be  maintained 
is  not  clear.  The  weir  prescribed  in  the  second  paragraph  adds  to  the  complication. 
If  a  branch  ditch  has  fall  enough  and  capacity  enough  below  the  weir  to  give  a  free 
escape  of  the  water  from  the  bulkhead,  the  velocity  increases  with  the  depth  on  the 
weir  and  this  depth  varies  with  the  head  in  the  ditch.  If  the  grade  of  the  branch 
ditch  below  its  headgate  is  light,  the  water  escapes  slowly,  and  the  velocity  over  the 
weir  is  retarded.  Under  what  set  of  conditions  any  given  ditch  would  receive  the 
water  at  the  velocity  of  2  feet  per  second  could  be  ascertained  only  by  a  series  of 
velocity  measurements.  I  could  not  find  that  these  had  been  made.  '  The  ordinance 
does  not  secure  either  regularity  in  the  volume  delivered  or  uniformity  in  the  price 
paid  for  water,  and  these  irregularities  are  the  cause  of  much  complaint  on  the  part 
Of  the  water  users. 

HISTOEY   OF   OTHER  ATTEMPTED  APPROPRIATIONS  AND  CONSEQUENT 

LITIGATION. 

In  1859  a  number  of  farmers  in  the  vicinity  of  Cacheville,  now  Yolo,  organized 
the  Cacheville  Agricultural  Ditch  Company  and  built  a  ditch  for  the  watering  of 
their  own  land.  The  ditch  has  its  headgate  on  the  north  side  of  the  stream  at  a 
point  about  5  miles  above  the  town  and  a  short  distance  below  the  Moore  Dam.  It 
extended  to  a  point  about  1  mile  below  Cacheville  and  covered  several  thousand  acres 
on  the  north  side  of  the  creek.  Some  of  the  stockholders  had  holdings  on  the  south 
side,  and  the  water  was  carried  across  the  creek  to  these  lands  in  an  iron  pipe  -i  feet 
in  diameter  and  about  200  feet  long.  Their  dam  was  of  gravel  and  was  replaced  each 
year.  An  elaborate  system  of  laterals  was  constructed  and  the  land  prepared  for 
irrigation  at  heavy  expense.  This  ditch  was  built  and  in  operation  as  early  as  the 
spring  of  1860.  It  is  estimated  that  the  total  expense  of  all  the  work  was  about 
|>75.000.  As  before  stated,  the  Moore  Ditch,  later  known  as  the  Woodland  Ditch,  was 
enlarged  in  1864  and  the  use  of  the  water  extended  to  new  lands.  This,  when  water 
was  low,  interfered  with  the  operations  of  the  Cacheville  Company  and  they  sought 
the  protection  of  the  district  court.  In  their  complaint  they  asked  for  an  adjudica- 
tion of  rights  as  between  the  Woodland  and  the  Cacheville  companies,  for  an  assess- 
ment of  damages  against  the  Woodland  Company,  and  for  an  injunction  restraining 
the  Woodland  Company  from  diverting  the  water.  For  answer  the  defendant  sets 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  177 

tip  the  Gordon  and  Harbin  deeds  to  Moore,  claiming  under  these  deeds  the  exclusive 
right  "to  all  the  waters  that  did  or  could  run  in  Cache  Creek,"  as  against  the  Cache- 
villc  people  who  were  on  the  Harbin  grant  and  whose  deeds  were  of  later  date  than 
Moore's  right  of  way  deed  from  Harbin.  It  is  interesting  to  look  back  at  the  Harbin 
deed  in  this  connection  to  see  what  it  really  did  convey.  (See  quotation  on  p.  172.) 

The  defendant  denies  the  complaint  of  the  plaintiff  and  avers,  among  other 
things — 

That  in  1856  the  defendant  had  constructed  a  dam,  ditch,  and  headgate  of  suffi- 
cient capacity  to  carry  all  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek  except  when  swollen  by  winter 
rains; 

That  in  1863  and  186-1  the  defendant  had  cleaned  and  enlarged  this  ditch  to  about 
the  capacity  originally  intended,  and  that  now  his  ditch  carried  no  more  water  than 
it  was  originally  intended  to  carry. 

November  11,  1871,  judgment  was  rendered  in  this  case  in  favor  of  the  Cache- 
ville  Company.  The  findings  are  too  long  to  be  quoted  here,  but  the  conclusion  is  as 
follows: 

As  conclusions  of  the  law  the  court  finds: 

(1)  That  the  defendant  jointly  with  one  F.  W.  Fratt  is  first  entitled  to  divert  2.43  cubic  feet  of 
the  water  of  Cache  Creek  per  second. 

(2)  That  the  plaintiff  is  next  entitled  at  all  times  to  divert  from  the  said  Cache  Creek  a  quantity 
of  water  equal  to  the  capacity  of  its  ditch. 

(3)  That  the  capacity  of  the  plaintiff's  ditch  is  that  quantity  of  water  which  would  flow  through 
it  when  for  two-thirds  of  the  length  of  the  ditch  from  its  upper  end  it  is  of  the  size  of  15  feet  in  width 
on  the  bottom,  4J  feet  deep,  with  a  slope  at  the  sides  outward  from  the  bottom  of  1  j  feet  to  each  foot 
in  height  and  a  grade  of  three-eighths  inches  to  each  100  feet  in  length,  and  the  remaining  third  in 
length  of  said  ditch  is  of  the  size  of  10  feet  in  width  on  the  bottom,  5J  feet  deep  with  a  slope  at  the 
sides  outward  from  the  bottom  of  1}  feet  to  each  foot  in  height,  and  a  grade  of  1  inch  to  each  100  feet 
in  length. 

(4)  That  the  plaintiff  is  entitled  to  a  decree  perpetually  restraining  the  defendant  and  all  persons 
claiming  or  to  claim  by,  through,  or  under  it  since  the  commencement  of  the  action,  and  its  officers, 
agents,  and  employees  from  diverting  more  than  2.43  cubic  feet  per  second  of  the  water  of  said  creek 
unless  at  such  times  as  there  may  be  more  water  flowing  in  said  creek  than  would  supply  the  said  2.43 
cubic  feet  per  second  and  fill  the  plaintiff's  ditch  to  its  full  capacity,  as  hereinbefore  set  out. 

(5)  That  plaintiff  is  further  entitled  to  a  judgment  for  $10  damages  accrued  before  the  com- 
mencement of  this  action,  and  the  costs  and  disbursements  by  it  in  this  action. 

And  it  is  so  ordered. 

T.  B  RIORDAN, 
District  Judge  of  the  Fourteenth  Judicial  District, 

presiding  at  the  request  of,  etc. 
Attest: 

W.  B.  BROWN,  Clerk. 

The  motion  for  a  new  trial  was  denied.  On  January  22,  1873,  the  case  was 
appealed.  October  30,  1874,  the  supreme  court  of  California  rendered  judgment 
reversing  the  findings  of  the  lower  courts  and  remanding  the  case  with  instruction 
to  the  lower  court  to  render  judgment  for  the  Woodland  Company,  pursuant  to  the 
specific  prayer  of  the  answer.  October  31,  1874,  the  district  judge  rendered  judg- 
ment as  ordered,  with  costs  for  the  defendants  $312.65.  The  Cacheville  Agricultural 
Ditch  Company  went  out  of  business.  The  ditch,  being  useless  and  an  obstruction 

23856— No.  100—01 12 


178  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

to  cultivation,  has  been  largely  obliterated.  Thus  closes  the  first  chapter  in  the  liti- 
gation over  the  Cache  Creek  waters. 

In  1871  the  Clear  Lake  Water  Company  began  the  construction  of  a  dam  at  the 
head  of  the  Capay  Valley,  a  short  distance  above  where  Rumsey  Station  now  stands. 
This  ditch  was  not  completed  and  put  into  use  until  1874.  Originally  it  extended 
some  9  miles  down  the  valley,  but  was  never  used  beyond  Guinda,  6  miles  below 
the  point  of  diversion.  Near  the  head  the  lands  were  nearly  all  watered,  but  below 
the  use  was  not  general.  July  31,  1876,  two  years  after  the  ditch  was  completed 
and  used,  complaint  was  filed  by  the  Woodland  Ditch  Company  against  the  owners 
of  this  ditch.  Again  Moore's  title  to  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek,  "all  of  them,"  as 
derived  from  Gordon,  was  set  up.  Among  other  modest  affirmations  of  the  com- 
plaint are — 

The  said  ditch,  at  its  full  capacity,  is  capable  of  carrying  about  80,000  cubic  feet  of  water  per 
minute; 

That  the  amount  of  the  waters  so  diverted  by  the  defendant  was  2,000  feet,  all  of  which  belonged 
to  the  plaintiff  by  prior  appropriation  and  right  of  property,  and  which  would  have,  had  it  not  been 
so  diverted,  flowed  into  the  ditch  of  the  plaintiff,  and  could  have  been  sold  at  the  rate  of  $4  per  foot. 

The  plaintiff  pr&ys  for  an  injunction  restraining  the  defendant  from  taking  any 
water  from  the  creek  belonging  to  the  plaintiff,  and  asks  that  the  court  will  determine 
by  its  decree  the  rights  of  the  plaintiff  and  defendant  to  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek. 
For  answer  the  defendant  denies  the  allegations  of  the  plaintiff  and  attacks  the 
legality  of  the  Woodland  Ditch  Company  as  a  corporation. 

The  plaintiff  was  nonsuited  and  costs  taxed  at  $345.05  were  awarded  to  the 
defendant. 

August  30,  1878,  James  Moore  again  appears  in  his  own  name  with  a  new  com- 
plaint. He  claims: 

That  he  is  the  owner  of  the  right  to  divert  all  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek  flowing  through  the 
creek  at  the  commencement  of  the  Moore  Ditch,  except  at  times  of  high  freshets. 

That  the  ditch  is  18  feet  wide  and  10  feet  deep,  and  that  he  is  informed  and  believes  the  same  is 
capable  of  carrying  180  cubic  feet  of  water  running  at  a  velocity  of  4  feet  per  second. 

That  he  is  entitled  to  have  the  waters  of  said  creek  flow  uninterruptedly  down  the  creek  and 
into  and  through  his  ditch  at  all  times  when  there  is  not  water  in  said  creek  in  excess  of  said  amount. 
Later  this  complaint  is  amended  to  show  that  Moore  is  a  riparian  owner. 

For  answer  the  Clear  Lake  Company  admits  the  diversion  of  the  waters,  but 
enters  a  denial  of  all  the  alleged  rights  of  the  plaintiff  and  further  denies: 

That  the  water  diverted  by  the  defendant  is  or  could  be  of  any  value  whatever  to  the  plaintiff,  and 
avers,  according  to  and  upon  its  information  and  belief,  that  none  of  the  water  which  is  or  ever  has 
been  diverted  to  the  defendant's  ditch  ever  could  or  would  reach  the  point  in  the  natural  channel  of 
said  creek  where  plaintiff  claims  the  right  to  divert  the  same;  and,  on  the  contrary,  that  all  the  waters 
flowing  in  said  creek,  at  the  point  where  the  defendant  diverts  the  same,  was  before  such  diversion, 
and  if  not  diverted  would  continue  to  be  lost  and  absorbed  in  the  earth  and  in  the  air  before  it  reached 
the  point  where  plaintiff  claims  the  right  to  divert  the  same;  and  that  all  the  water  which  ever  did 
flow  in  Cache  Creek  at  the  point  where  the  plaintiff  claims  the  right  to  divert  the  same  rises  in  springs 
and  collect*  in  watersheds  situate  below  the  point  where  defendant  diverts  water  from  said  creek,  and 
wholly  independent  of  the  water  flowing  in  said  creek  at  said  last-named  point. 

The  defendant  also  avers: 

That  it  has  been  in  sole  and  uninterrupted  possession  of  all  waters,  water  rights,  franchise?,  and 
property  which  it  now  holds,  and  which  it  is  charged  in  said  complaint  with  holding,  without 
interruption,  for  more  than  five  years  previous  to  commencement  of  suit. 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  179 

The  amended  answer  of  the  defendant  denies  the  amended  complaint.  Again 
Moore  is  nonsuited,  and  costs  to  the  amount  of  $228.30  are  taxed  against  him. 

September  3,  1880,  Moore  files  a  new  complaint  with  the  superior  court.  Com- 
plaint and  answer  in  this  case  are  practically  identical  with  the  last  proceeding. 
Judgment  was  rendered  for  the  plaintiff  August  20,  1883.  It  read  as  follows: 

The  court  finds: 

(1)  That  all  the  allegations  of  the  complaint  are  true,  except  that  the  capacity  of  the  ditch  of  the 
plaintiff  described  is  432  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second. 

(2)  That  all  the  allegation*  of  the  answer  herein  are  untrue. 
Ordered,  adjudged,  and  decreed: 

(1)  That  plaintiff  is  the  owner  of  and  entitled  at  all  times  to  appropriate  and  take  out  of  the 
waters  of  Cache  Creek  432  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  at  the  head  of  that  certain  water  ditch 
belonging  to  plaintiff  and  generally  known  as  the  Woodland  or  Moore  Ditch;  to  direct  said  waters 
into  and  through  said  ditch;  and  to  use  the  same  and  furnish  the  same  to  others  to  be  used  for 
domestic,  stock,  and  agricultural  purposes,  all  without  any  interruption  on  the  part  of  the  defendant. 

(2)  That  defendant,  and  all  and  each  of  its  officers,  servants,  agents,  and  employees,  be  and  are 
hereby  forever  enjoined  and  restrained  from  diverting  any  of  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek  by  any  means 
whatever,  or  in  any  manner  whatever  interfering  with  the  natural  flow  of  water  around  said  cfeek, 
and  in  the  plaintiff's  said  ditch,  at  any  and  all  times  where  there  is  not  sufficient  water  naturally 
flowing  in  and  down  said  creek  to  supply  plaintiff's  said  ditch  with  the  full  amount  of  432  cubic  feet  of 
water  per  second. 

(3)  That  plaintiff  recover  costs  taxed  at  $459.99. 

By  what  evidence  the  court  was  guided  in  lixing  the  amount  of  the  appropriation 
at  432  cubic  feet  per  second  does  not  appear,  as  the  testimony  was  never  transcribed. 
There  is  no  evidence  in  the  works  as  they  exist  to-day  that  any  such  volume  ever 
was  or  could  have  been  carried  by  the  Woodland  Ditch. 

The  case  was  appealed.  The  only  important  points  raised  in  appeal  were  the 
sufficiency  of  the  complaint  and  findings  to  support  the  judgment.  The  judgment 
was  affirmed  and  a  rehearing  denied. 

The  Clear  Lake  Company's  enterprise  was  abandoned.  A  few  of  the  landowners 
in  the  vicinity  of  Rumsey  keep  up  the  headgate  and  temporary  dam,  so  that  occa- 
sionally a  little  water  is  taken  through  the  ditch  for  their  orchards  and  gardens  and  a 
few  small  patches  of  alfalfa.  The  area  irrigated  is  about  100  acres.  Plate  XVI  shows 
the  condition  of  this  ditch  at  the  present  time.  The  water  now  used  is  carried  in 
the  small  flume  shown  on  the  lower  bank.  These  people  at  Rumsey  claim  as  riparian 
owners,  but  their  rights  are  unrecorded  and  undefined,  and  all  that  has  protected 
them  from  ruinous  litigation  is  the  insignificance  of  the  volume  diverted. 

The  Clear  Lake  Company  also  began  the  construction  of  extensive  works  a  short 
distance  above  the  town  of  Capay.  Here  they  built  a  substantial  timber  dam  and 
did  some  work  on  two  canals  designed  to  water  a  large  portion  of  the  valley  on  both 
sides  of  Cache  Creek.  These  works  were  also  abandoned.  Plate  XVI  shows  the 
ruined  dam.  It  is  estimated  that  the  Clear  Lake  Company  has  in  all  spent  .some 
$150,000  on  its  various  enterprises  in  this  locality. 

On  the  farm  of  D.  Q.  Adams,  a  few  miles  east  of  Capay,  on  the  north  side  of  the 
creek,  a  small  ditch  was  constructed  in  1870  to  irrigate  a  vegetable  garden  conducted 
by  some  Chinamen.  This  was  enlarged  and  extended  in  1871  or  1872,  and  again  in 
1878,  and  still  again  in  1882.  The  ditch  as  originally  constructed  in  1870  carried  3 
or  4  cubic  feet  per  second  and  watered  about  20  acres.  By  1888,  through  changes, 


180  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

extensions,  and  enlargements,  it  had  ;i  capacity  at  the  head,  according  to  evidence 
later  submitted  in  court,  of  24S  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  a  mile  and  a  quarter  below 
the  head  41  cubic  feet  per  second.  It  then  extended  to  near  Cache ville  and  watered 
some  300  acres. 

In  the  summer  of  180-4  a  company  of.  farmers  and  landowners  in  the  western 
part  of  the  valley  organized  the  Cotton  wood  Ditch  Company  and  began  a  ditch  on 
the  south  side,  starting  from  a  point  near  Capay  and  extending  to  1  mile  below  Madi- 
son. The  ditch  was  partly  constructed  and  the  dam  put  in,  but  during  the  winter  it 
was  washed  away  by  the  floods.  The  ditch  was  never  used. 

In  1877  the  Capay  Ditch  Company  was  organized  and  began  the  construction  of 
another  ditch,  taking  water  from  the  creek  at  the  mouth  of  the  gorge  above  Capay, 
near  the  site  of  the  large  dam  of  the  Clear  Lake  Water  Company,  of  which  we  have 
before  spoken.  They  acquired  the  rights  of  the  Cottonwood  Ditch  Company  (what- 
ever they  were).  The  line  of  the  new  construction  crossed  the  old  line  in  several 
places,  but  whether  the  old  channel  was  utilized  is  not  clear.  The  opening  of  the 
Capay  Ditch,  with  its  promise  of  better  agricultural  methods,  was  celebrated  with 
rejoicing  as  an  important  event  in  Yolo  County  history. 

As  the  use  of  water  extended  under  the  Adams,  Capay,  and  Woodland  ditches,  it 
became  apparent  that  at  certain  seasons  there  was  not  water  enough  for  all.  The 
owners  of  the  Adams  and  Capay  ditches  were  able  to  harmonize  their  interests,  but 
between  these  and  the  Woodland  management  there  could  be  no  peace.  Believing 
that  his  rights  were  invaded,  and  fearing  that  the  continuous  adverse  use  of  the  water 
by  the  upper  ditches  might  ripen  into  a  claim  which  would  ultimately  dispossess  him 
of  his  rights,  Moore  was  again  compelled  to  get  into  court. 

In  1882  the  case  of  James  Moore  v.  The  Capay  and  Adams  Ditch  companies 
appears  in  the  records  of  the  superior  court  of  Yolo  County.  A  temporary  injunc- 
tion was  asked  restraining  each  of  the  above  companies  from  taking  water  from 
Cache  Creek,  and  asking  for  an  adjudication  of  the  rights  of  the  plaintiff  and  defend- 
ant. Moore  now  claimed  20,000  inches  under  a  4-inch  pressure  (400  cubic  feet  per 
second).  His  claim  is  based  on — 

(1)  Appropriation  of  this  volume  of  water,  alleging  ownership  of  a  ditch  with 
capacity  to  carry  the  amount  claimed. 

(2)  The  right  of  a  riparian  owner,  alleging  ownership  of  riparian  lands  to  the 
amount  of  1,056J  acres. 

For  answer  the  Capay  Ditch  Company  denies  the  plaintiff's  appropriation  exceeds 
500  inches  (10  cubic  feet  per  second),  and  alleges — 

(1)  Ownership  of  Capay  Ditch  and  appropriation  and  use  of  10,000  inches  of 
water  flowing  under  a  4-inch  pressure  (200  cubic  feet  per  second). 

(2)  Ownership  of  5,697.36  acres  of  land  by  its  stockholders,  and  the  rights  of  its 
stockholders  and  riparian  owners  to  use  the  water  for  the  irrigation  of  their  land. 

(3)  Prescription  by  adverse  use  under  claim  of  use  for  more  than  five  years. 
The  answer  of  Adams  also  denies  that  the  plaintiffs  appropriation  exceeds  500 

inches.     He,  too,  alleges— 

(1)  Ownership  of  land  on  the  stream. 

(2)  Ownership  of  ditch  and  the  appropriation  of  8,000  inches  of  water  under  a 
4-iuch  pressure  (160  cubic  feet  per  second). 

(3)  Right  by  prescription. 


U.  S.  Dept   of  Agr  ,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Exnt    Stations.      Irrigation  In 


PLATE  XVI. 


pONED 

result 


,YOLO   COUNTY, 
CALIFORNIA. 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  181 

The  temporary  injunction  prayed  for  was  granted  and  the  operation  of  the  Capay 
and  Adams  ditches  ceased. 

The  battle  royal  was  now  on.  Eminent  lawyers  and  expert  engineers  were 
engaged  for  the  preparation  of  the  ca.se. 

A.  theory  of  the  defense,  of  which  much  was  made  in  this  trial,  was  that  the 
waters  of  the  creek,  sinking  in  the  channel  at  Capay,  did  not  again  appear,  but  passed 
oft'  through  the  gravel  stratji  to  the  southeast,  and  that  the  waters  which  appeared  in 
the  channel  In-low  Madison  Bridge  had  their  source  in  an  underground  supply  coming 
from  the  hills  to  the  northwest  through  a  depression  known  as  Hungry  Hollow.  An 
elaborate  and  expensive  survey  was  made  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  this  con- 
tention. Existing  wells  were  examined  and  many  new  ones  bored  for  the  purpose 
of  showing  the  character  of  the  underground  strata  and  the  water  levels  of  this 
territory.  The  complainant  was  equally  strenuous  in  his  contention  that  the  waters 
sinking  at  Capay  were  the  same  that  reappeared  above  his  dam,  and  that  to  allow 
these  upper  ditches  to  take  water  could  only  result  in  ruin  for  him  and  distress  for 
those  who  depended  on  his  ditch  for  water.  He,  too,  had  his  experts  in  the  field 
Leathering  facts  and  figures  to  substantiate  his  theory  of  the  course  of  the  underground 
waters. 

April  24,  1888,  the  cause  came  to  trial.  For  weeks  the  case  dragged  its  slow 
length  along,  adding  volume  after  volume  of  testimony,  exception,  and  objection. 
Expert  witnesses  for  the  plaintiff  testified  to  the  class  of  facts  that  they  had  been  sent 
out  to  find,  and  those  for  the  defense  were  equally  loyal  to  their  employers.  May 
17,  1888,  after  six  large  volumes  of  typewritten  testimony  had  been  taken,  the 
presiding  judge  stsited  that  on  account  of  sickness  it  would  be  impossible  for  him  to 
hear  further  testimony.  By  stipulation  the  hearing  was  continued  before  a  court 
commissioner  appointed  for  the  purpose.  Two  more  volumes  of  oral  testirnoi^  were 
added  and  the  case  was  submitted  May  24,  1888. 

To  find  anv  capable  jurist  who  would  undertake  the  appalling  and  thankless  task 
of  digesting  all  this  accumulation  of  fact  and  theory,  exception  and  objection,  and 
who  was  acceptable  to  both  parties  to  the  controversy,  was  not  easy.  Twelve  years 
have  passed,  and  no  referee  on  whom  the  contending  parties  have  been  able  to  agree 
has  ever  been  willing  or  has  found  time  to  take  up  the  matter  and  reach  a  decision. 
The  cherished  hope  of  the  men  who  built  these  works  of  an  improved  husbandry, 
which  should  restore  and  perpetuate  the  fertility  of  their  fields,  failed.  The  vision 
of  meadow  and  pasture  and  orchard  and  vineyard  and  garden  and  pleasant  homes 
vanished.  In  its  place  continued  the  dull  round  of  plowing  and  sowing  and  reaping 
wheat,  while  diminished  production  keeps  pace  with  soil  deterioration  and  the  mort- 
gage consumes. 

Through  all  these  years  the  temporary  injunction  issued  thirteen  years  ago  con- 
tinues in  force.  The  Capay  Ditch  has  been  plowed  in  and  the  Adams  Ditch  is  a 
wreck,  irrigating  about  20  acres  and  carrying  a  little  water  for  stock.  Plate  XVI 
shows  sections  of  the  Capay  and  Adams  ditches  that  have  escaped  obliteration. 

April  15,  1884,  James  Moore  died.  The  clauses  of  his  will  disposing  of  the 
ditch  are: 

9.  I  give  and  bequeath  to  my  grandsons,  William  Wall  and  James  Moore,  and  to  the  survivors 
of  them,  that  property  known  as  the  Woodland  Ditch,  including  all  its  water  rights  and  extensions  to 


.182  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

be  made  thereto,  and  about  50  acres  of  land  at  the  head  of  the  ditch;    :  h    and  also  all  land 

occupied  by  said  ditch  and  branches;  and  also  the  strip  of  land  on  each  side  thereof  reserved  for  the 
purpose  of  said  ditch  in  the  several  tequests  herebefore  made  to  my  wife  and  children;  all  to  be  held 
by  them  or  the  survivors  of  them  in  trust,  however,  for  the  following  purposes: 

(1)  To  hold  and  retain  said  ditch,  with  all  the  rights,  privileges,  and  appurtenances  pertaining 
thereto,  and  all  the  land  held  in  connection  therewith,  so  long  as  said  trustees  or  survivors  of  them 
shall  live. 

(2)  To  keep  said  ditch  and  branches  in  good  repair  and  fit  for  service,  and  make  such  extensions 
and  additions  as  may  seem  best. 

(3)  To  collect  all  the  rente  and  profits  for  the  sales  of  water  or  otherwise,  and  from  the  money  so 
received  pay  all  expenses  for  repairs,  additions,  and  extensions,  and  a  reasonable  compensation  for  the 
care  and  management  of  said  property;  and  pay  over  the  balance,  if  any,  to  my  wife  during  her  life, 
and  after  her  death  the  net  income  to  be  divided  annually  into  five  shares,  one  share  to  be  paid  to 
each  of  my  ch'ldren  living,  or  if  dead,  then  to  their  descendants.     In  no  case  shall  any  debt  be  con- 
tracted in  said  property  which  shall  exceed  the  receipts  from  it. 

10.  Inasmuch  as  the  said  William  Wall  and  James  Moore  are  minors,    *    *    *    I  hereby  appoint 
my  wife  to  manage  and  control  said  property  so  long  as  she  may  live,  and  at  her  death  that 
my  son  Robert  Moore  shall  manage  and  control  said  property  until  the  trustees  first  named  shall  have 
each  arrived  at  majority.     *    *    * 

11.  Upon  the  death  of  said  trustees  and  survivors  of  them,  all  the  property  herein  bequeathed  to 
them  in  trust  shall  be  sold  and  the  proceeds  divided  into  five  parts.     One  for  each  of  my  children,  and 
in  case  of  death  of  any  one  or  more  of  my  said  children,  then  the  descendants  of  such  deceased  shall 
take  the  share.     *    *    * 

Thus,  with  a  strange  mingling  of  faith  in  tjhe  enterprise,  which  for  more  than  a 
quarter  of  a  century  had  claimed  his  time  and  strength,  and  of  misguided  love  for 
his  offspring,  did  this  strong-willed  old  man  entail  on  his  two  innocent  grandchildren 
the  burden  which  he  now  laid  down. 

In  1886  the  permanent  dam  was  washed  away.  Hampered  and  hedged  about  by 
the  provisions  and  limitations  of  this  strange  bequest,  the  trustees  have  found  them- 
selves unable  to  replace  the  dam  or  make  other  much-needed  repairs.  They  have 
not  been  able  to  operate  the  ditch  to  the  satisfaction  of  either  themselves,  the  heirs, 
or  the  water  users.  During  all  these  forty -four  years  since  James  Moore  first  began 
his  ditch,  nearly  half  a  century,  the  waters  of  Cache  Creek  have  been  going  to  waste, 
and  for  all  this  outlay  of  energy  and  treasure  there  is  nothing  to  show  but  these 
voluminous  court  records  and  one  mismanaged  ditch,  irrigating  in  an  ineffectual, 
unreliable  way  from  5,000  to  7,000  acres  per  annum  out  of  a  possible  40,000  to  50,000 
acres  that  the  natural  flow  of  this  stream  should  water  and  make  fruitful.  The 
physical  difficulties'  to  overcome  are  insignificant.  Time  after  time  energy  and 
capital  have  brushed  these  aside  only  to  find  themselves  involved  in  a  maze  of  endless 
litigation  which  leads  nowhere  and  settles  nothing. 

In  1864  the  Clear  Lake  Company  built  a  dam  and  mill  at  Lower  Lake  on  Cache 
Creek  a  short  distance  below  the  outlet  of  Clear  Lake.  This  dam  interfered  with 
the  flow  at  the  outlet  and  was  so  operated  that  in  times  of  high  water  the  town  of 
Upper  Lake  and  all  the  lowlands  adjacent  to  the  lake  were  inundated.  Remonstrance 
proving  unavailing,  the  assistance  of  the  Lake  County  court  was  invoked.  When 
the  case  came  to  trial,  tradition  reports  that  the  presiding  judge,  whose  sympathies 
were  evidently  with  the  sufferers,  decided  that  this  court  could  furnish  no  legal  remedy 
for  the  difficulties  complained  of.  In  rendering  this  decision,  while  commenting  on 
the  case,  the  judge  intimated  that  there  was  a  law  "higher  than  statute  or  procedure 


U    S    Dept   of  Agr.,  Bui    100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XVII. 


CACHE  CREEK, 

YOLO  COUNTY, 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  183 

of  court,'1  which  when  the  necessity  arose  might  be  invoked.  A  few  days  later  a 
force  of  citizens  of  Lake  County  appeared  at  the  mill,  and  after  removing  carefully 
everything  that  was  movable  destroyed  the  works.  This  was  in  1868.  The  milldam 
and  mill  were  never  replaced,  but  Lake  County  is  still  paying  interest  on  bonds  issued 
to  liquidate  the  damages  incurred  through  this  appeal  to  "higher  law." 

PUMPING  PLANTS. 

Discouraged  by  the  difficulties  attending  the  use  of  water  from  the  ditches, 
si  number  of  pumping  plants  have  been  established  along  and  near  Cache  Creek. 
Views  of  some  of  these  are  shown  in  PI.  XVII.  These  were  visited,  and  data  con- 
cerning their  operation  collected  from  the  owners.  A  table  exhibiting  the  more 
important  facts  collected  is  herewith  given.  Several  of  these  plants  pump  directly 
from  the  creek,  and  the  farmers  who  use  wells  would  prefer  the  water  from  the 
stream  if  it  could  be  obtained  when  needed.  The  surface  waters  carry  elements  of 
fertility  which  are  wanting  in  the  underground  supply.  The  only  advantage  of  the 
well  is  its  independence  of  other  uses.  Except  the  Yolo  orchard,  the  Jackson,  the 
Blowers,  and  Peart  places,  the  farms  are  small.  They  well  illustrate  what  may  be 
done  on  small  areas  well  cultivated  when  water  can  be  had  as  needed.  The  expense 
of  pumping  is  considerable,  and  for  field  crops  would,  except  under  very  careful 
management,  be  prohibitory.  But  with  orchard  and  vineyard  and  garden,  where  the 
value  of  the  crop  as  compared  with  the  area  to  be  irrigated  is  great,  it  can  be  made 
a  success.  The  water  is  raised  from  10  to  35  feet,  and  the  fuel  used  is  wood,  coal, 
gasoline,  brush,  or  straw,  the  last  named  probably  being  the  cheapest. 

There  are  20-acre  farms  in  the  list  given  that  employ  more  help  and  whose  crops 
bring  greater  net  returns  than  many  of  the  large  'wheat  farms  of  Yolo  County. 
The  table  contains  material  worthy  of  careful  study  and  of  further  discussion,  but 
time  and  space  forbid. 


184 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


"S  a 

S                                              i 

>  C 
P'           S 

1     §                i 

| 

<°.  -on                         >o       -0   a  10    i    ,;.        *    i,  c 

rH      gj              Q>                                                 QJ               ^^^a^               ^"^ 
oT^!               ^                                              "^               '"pH^41              S^Si 

5OtH         ^                       ^t-         t*'^o^!-oir:-'"aj 

00                      i-i                                                C^              ^-1                                                ^( 

Total  yield  per 
annum. 

-••a       t   s   ai  ~  &       "O        £  -o   S   £  t,       •c£.i°1S 
|  i       2  S  I       5       "        c.iS8c       -   o   1   - 

^•O           *O    r-     ft    3            ee*O            p.'C^aaj           "^    's    *C            ^i 

ggs|s"T3'°'0   =   s|g|'°5«|s5'0v,-a2 

* 

lapil 

CO                      CO                                                CO              •*                                                -^ 

w 

0%                             rH                                                                                       r~l                                                                t- 

Acres  farmed  and 
to  what  planted. 

! 

C 

X 

_c 

I 

.5           .S  .S                           .S  .£  .S  .S           S  §  .S               £ 

I,    iff         1    s^f.    111         i 

££       S°§              S       ^-gS^s       ^tfSis           £ 

p,      ••    fl/ 

'  *  N 

rt  O  fl  £  sA 

1" 

1^-                      U5                                                •**"              CO                                                C$                                                CN 

iaj'oi»2'.>. 
i!"1g§'sa&ve 

s 

ir 

5 

83                        88                        8                        S 

3  WS 

|     s           s  §           i         '  § 

Reliability  of  supply. 

£ 

3 

c 

1 

C 

C 

a 
i 
C 
C 

.  i  s     |                                                       { 

nl  I                                 * 

ft|!  s                                 - 

II     i             0    ^                                                                                                                                              ] 
-    ^    —"          +3    3 

I  g  1  i  s  I         €   5           €           \ 

v  g  •<  Z  s  "3 
co              CQ                                                                                                        c7 

fall  months. 

1 
1 

S 

" 

£ 

C 

c 

G 

• 
• 

&| 

35    ^« 
*o  ^ 

»i     0)                   O            .                           CO                                       0                                       C 

""  o 

hj 

C 

0 

| 
| 

f- 
a 

1    ill:                               ' 

1    1        11        1        1 

^       1                 a     ^                 e                ^ 

cf           fe                        ^d                        »                        & 

IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK. 


185 


§ 

1 

; 

S 

1 

e» 

! 

m 

o 

CO 

! 

§ 

! 

: 

; 

"0 

c 

s 

V 

•i     S 

c 

.    , 

• 

; 

; 

9 

§ 
S 

berries  . 

0> 

•G 

o 

0 

o 

4 

c 

I 

1 

0) 
(-, 

C 
« 

reen  apr 
on  s  gree 

3 

cf 
-  * 

£   13 

*            i§ 

o.  a 

5            'S   S 

October 

i 
i 

i 

i 

0.5  ton  al 

166  cases 

o 

CO 
CO 

o>    O 

II 

E,  = 

2.6  tons  d 

O 

f>    it 

§,  2  ? 

f! 

*            'C    c 

1       a« 

s       1  " 

S 
3 

prunes,  0.">  ton 
ilrit-d  apricots, 
1.5  tons  almonds, 

24  tons  grapes. 
9.5  tons  almonds  ... 

3,000  cases  berries  .  . 

i 

V 

1 

1 

s 

40  tons  dried  prunes, 

5.75  tons  almonds. 

40  tons  dried  prunes  . 

•c 

h 

•C 

O 

to 

M 

prunes. 
60  tons  apricots,  30 
tons  peaches,  0.5 

ton  almonds. 

s        s  .-  s 

§           2  §5 

!    jMa 

*-  Pi 

§§  isg 

«       s 

$7.50  per  acre. 
'.  Every  ten  days  fron 

1                                       O 

- 

N 

(N 

H 

M 

(N 

T 

^ 

- 

1-1 

rt 

)                          r- 

/ 

a 

8 

a 

O 

8 

00 

S 

1 

i 

& 

a 

\ 

«?  --1 

s 

C     C    T3 

i 

a  a 

1 

'•2              * 
S.             = 

'    a)                       r 
C                        i 

>            * 

C                      •£ 

i 

j 

43     S8               .oi 

oj    fi        "E  ^  Jj 

in  prunes,  1 
n  almonds, 

n  peaches, 
in  prunes,  5 
10  in  alfalfa. 

1 

«            § 
rf  "    • 

g      .  13 

•g   S   « 
»•§  S  M 

*    s    S    a 

9 
.S 

in  alfalfa,  20 
>runes,  20 
Umonds. 

week  during 

>   '"                      r- 

e 

"*    h    ^    m   **"     > 

Cj 

S 

0 

o 

00 

8 

a 

)                                                    T 

<c 

3 

• 

2 

vl 

10 

CN 

to 

a 

0 

!                    S 

E 

8 

8 

g 

S 

8 

g 

8 

i                            a 

<N 

ui 

CO 

10* 

00 

00 

t» 

N 

s 

g 

g 

g 

a 

g 

S 

4                                            ^ 

)                                            X 

•f 

s 

« 

- 

: 

i 

tg 

; 

:              = 

; 

: 

o 

la 

g 

*>  3 

i 

•              c 

i 

: 

S 

3 

a  JR 

- 

„ 

j 

a 

| 

o»    cd 

fl 

o 

I            1 

1                1 

j 

1 

n 

C 

•c 

•t 

1 

X 

•3  * 

^ 

0                         > 

1        1 

;i      i 

o 

•o 

A 

3 
02 

£ 

O 

3 

CO 

c 

»            P 

OB 

j 

1 

c 
T 

oo     p,    gj 

111 

o  S 
v  JS  **  j 
*  *  «l  1 

^ 

,j 

•g  s  s 

oj 

•s  1  & 

35    ?    o 
0    «  "° 

ill 

c    ^    ^J 

feet  from  Cache 

Creek, 
tvo  12-inch  and 

ones-inch  wells. 

U    ! 

1!      1 

^    S              a 

<=  S             f 
S  «°              1 

l||lds 

oo     .  S  'g  cj  S  " 

•a  $ 

0     $ 

fl 

I« 

>   t*  *3   t> 

ires  pumping. 

.     H 

0 

0 

H 

H                    C 

H 

H 

B 

3 

„' 

: 

be 

1 

•I 

* 

I 

• 

1 

m 

1 

u 

9 

1 
1 

S 

E 

S 

!                  c 

1= 

BJ 

CO 

g 

PS 

6                        to 

w 

i                               IT 

< 

d 

i* 

J 

^ 

CO                        > 

O 

i-; 

186 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


P  -•                 •" 

; 

; 

ga        « 

: 

IE    i 

I 

s 

i 

|i      I 

' 

3 

s 

a 

a 
C 

'C 

«  I   *                1   I  "3 

13 

j 

•c 

5  «  f  .       •=  "  s 

•SI 

JB| 

f 

<^    co    .;;    5£                       (•••i    -2 

'&£ 

JS 

f 

X 

C 

to    °    §•  'S               "8    »    co 

I 

I 

in 

1 

*c 

V 

| 

3   <» 

*  I 
^   P. 

o  s  ,  2       a  g  8 

"  I  -g  §       s  §  §•  s 

»  S.  -S  S          rt  ft  B,  > 

•* 

• 

CO                                             CN 

ft 
29 

« 

! 

E 

'as 
•||| 

S  |3g  J     g  S§ 
•C  5  3-  i  *       g  £  2 

a 

o.  S   "5 

V.3 

9 

r     &S 

£     ;£     ft  '£              .    •—     j- 

_c 

"C 

c   *  ^3 

r 

I 

8 

a 
c 
: 

2  S  g 
833 

o^l^"Ol"cflQ>^'H'-* 

gft-oSa^Si,   MO 

CM                                                  i-l 

|4|lgi 

J 

2 

ST« 

i 

8       S 

V 

O                                                         CO 

PI 

3 

h 

j 

1     f 

•  "    c 

fU 

S 

O                 a 

-S      .S                                                      .2        C      ri      13 

^                                    «    *"    °    M 

li 

go. 
AI 

01  -g 
2^ 

W  O 

<% 

! 

; 
= 

i 

A       I 
1      1       | 

.s     s 

8-     S 

prunes,  che 

-i    ! 

s  -a 

*  i  3     5 

3,1      .£ 

« 

Q       of                                               r-       W      2       C     M 

•  It!     IH?i 

ofl    he                     '"    &c   O*  ^H    O 

ao-i.   ' 

!f   * 

O" 

00                                                         50 

fri"^ 

fe 

So'SiaC'-^ 

s 

i 

8 

8                      8 

>  ^  tn  Cit'S  M  f^  ^ 

2 

<£ 

o 

C^                                            U3 

•<       ^  O  oi  ft^^1 

rt 

•s^s 

S 

i                  i 

o|| 

i 

<N~                                                10" 

Si 

^4     t.                                       j 

^ 

•s 

ill      1 

& 

'S  0.  sg 

i 

j 

0            C 

c 

c 

1  *  «           a 

§ 

f 

E 

a 

* 

•c 

III 

Q                                 O 

^ 

— 

•a   «                    -o  "3 

1 

i 

'S 
*   a. 

a 
1 

d  *  1    •                *  - 

t% 
|| 

1 

~i 
c 

2 

1 

S  »  1 

3.2   g 

§8  i 

o      &. 

I 

C 

a 

i 
t 

x 
c 

< 
3 

i 

»  x   '   &               •?,   £    . 
•o  3  •§  ^                S   ^   §• 

«•     Q      fl     4*                                    Q      **      4) 

v    M    'V     o                              0*0 
CJ     4)    CO     OJ                             OJ     O     .-j 
""*    t     y    "••                        fc   *V    o 

ic    g    .2    oo                        9    oo    S 
co    O    S   r-                      o    i-i   <Si 

S                                 S 

< 

§                                  & 

^ 

X 

EC 

j 

5 

J9                      fe 

a 

C 

1     ' 

; 

§                     ^ 

0 

I 
i 

C 

1 

^   1 

8*     1 

,       B 
* 

1 

i        ;j 

? 

St. 

'-s           •- 

ff- 

a 

m                      « 

IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  187 

DUTY   OF   WATER. 

The  investigation  on  Cache  Creek  did  not  begin  until  June  26,  when  the 
irrigation  season  was  so  far  advanced  that  it  was  impossible  to  make  satisfactory 
observations  as  to  the  quantity  of  water  needed  in  this  locality  to  secure  the  best  crop 
results. 

With  a  view  to  reaching  some  general  conclusions  along  this  line,  the  statistics 
collected  from  the  users  of  water  under  the  Moore  Ditch  were  carefully  studied. 
But  it  was  soon  evident  that  no  conclusions  of  value  concerning  the  duty  of  water 
could  be  reached  by  the  study  of  results  obtained  under  such  adverse  conditions  as 
here  prevailed.  The  statistics  collected  from  the  pumping  plants  were  more  satis- 
factory, in  that  the  time  of  using  the  water  was  under  the  control  of  the  irrigators 
and  the  crop  returns  were  better;  but  as  few  of  them  were  pumping  at  the  time 
when  we  made  our  investigation,  we  had  in  most  cases  no  way  of  determining  the 
depth  of  water  used  except  by  computation  from  the  reported  capacity  of  the  pump 
and  the  acreage  reported  as  irrigated  per  day.  The  depths  were  all  computed,  and 
a  table  showing  the  duty  of  water  and  the  crop  returns  was  prepared  for  publication; 
but  a  study  of  the  table  shows  that  either  the  capacity  of  several  of  the  pumps  is 
much  overrated  or  that  water  is  used  with  great  extravagance  (in  pumping  the  cost 
is  an  effective  check  on  extravagance),  and  we  saw  no  evidence  of  such  excess  in  the 
use  of  water  on  these  tracts  as  the  reports  would  indicate.  The  probabilities  are 
that  the  owners  of  the  pumps  are  mistaken  as  to  their  capacity,  and  that  the  volumes 
used  are  much  less  than  the  computations  show.  The  table  has  therefore  been 
omitted  from  the  report.  Next  year  the  observations  in  this  locality  will  begin  with 
the  irrigating  season  and  be  continued  throughout  the  year  under  conditions  more 
favorable  for  accurate  measurements  and  with  greater  certainty  of  reaching  safe 
conclusions. 

PRESENT  CONDITIONS  AND  POSSIBILITIES  OF  YOLO  COUNTY. 

With  the  exception  of  the  few  pumping  plants  described,  the  Moore  Ditch  holds 
the  field.  The  capacity  of  the  ditch  as  managed  is  utterly  inadequate  to  the  demands  of 
the  territory  covered.  Except  for  those  who  are  most  favorably  situated,  there  can 
be  no  certainty  of  obtaining  water  when  desired.  When  water  is  most  needed  there 
are  always  more  users  wanting  it  than  can  possibly  be  served.  The  lack  of  certainty, 
or,  rather,  the  certainty  that  all  can  not  get  water,  operates  to  discourage  the  growing 
of  crops  requiring  irrigation.  The  cost  of  leveling  the  land  and  preparing  the  levees 
for  flooding,  which  is  almost  the  universal  custom  here,  is  no  small  item  of  expense. 
Unused  levees  are  not  only  useless,  but  are  impediments  to  cultivation  and  harvest- 
ing. The  water  user,  disappointed  in  getting  water  for  lands  already  prepared, 
has  little  encouragement  to  continue  or  extend  his  efforts.  The  more  progressive 
farmers,  who  are  convinced  that  the  growing  of  grain  is  impoverishing  the  soil  and 
who  would  gladly  change  to  a  mixed  husbandry  with  rotation  of  crops,  are  still 
compelled  to  grow  wheat  year  after  year  at  a  loss.  With  water  these  lands  will 
produce  four  to  six  crops  of  alfalfa  annually,  aggregating  5  to  10  tons  per  acre. 
With  this  alfalfa  and  the  other  forage  crops  that  would  be  possible  with  an  assured 
supply  of  water,  the  growing  of  cattle  and  sheep,  the  feeding  of  range  stock,  and 


188  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

hog  raising  would  all  be  profitable  industries.  The  possibilities  of  this  section  for 
dairying  have  been  amply  demonstrated  by  the  farmers  in  the  vicinity  of  Woodland 
and  Yolo.  The  long  season  that  it  is  possible  to  keep  stock  on  green  feed  in  this 
climate  when  water  can  be  supplied  for  the  irrigation  of  the  pastures  makes  the 
conditions  here  peculiarly  favorable  for  this  and  all  kindred  industries.  The  only 
drawback  i.s  the  lack  of  water  for  pasture  and  for  forage  crops. 

If  the  history  of  this  "chosen  valley"  was  different  from  others  we  might  look 
for  the  cause  of  all  this  dismal  failure  in  the  character  of  the  people  who  have  been 
engaged  in  these  enterprises,  but  the  managers  and  promoters  of  these  failing  ditch 
enterprises  were  not  weaklings.  Their  quality  is  approved  by  their  success  in  other 
lines  'before  and  since.  Their  fault  was  a  too  great  faith  in  a  system  which  was 
only  lack  of  system,  whose  pretended  regulation  gave  on\y  fancied  security  at  first  to 
later  add  to  their  embarrassment.  Everywhere,  all  over  California,  wherever  there 
has  been  enterprise  enough  to  attempt  to  use  the  water,  the  story  is  the  same.  The 
energy  and  capital  of  water  users  and  appropriators  are  consumed  in  litigation. 
The  cause  is  not  in  the  people  who  seek  to  utilize  the  water,  but  in  the  law  regulating 
the  appropriation  and  use  of  water. 

There  is  now  shipped  out  of  Yolo  County  annually  50,000  to  80,000  tons  of 
wheat.  If  the  water  wasted  in  Cache  Creek  were  conserved,  and  as  it  comes  down  to 
water  the  fields  used  in  manufacturing  this  wheat  into  flour,  one-third  of  this  tonnage 
might  be  left  behind  to  be  used  in  the  production  of  pork  and  mutton  and  beef  and 
dairy  products.  California  is  shipping  to-day  from  Chicago  and  Omaha  and  Kansas 
Cit3T  bacon  and  lard  that  she  can  produce  within  her  own  borders  as  cheaply  as  they 
can  be  placed  on  the  market  of  the  great  corn-producing  States.  The  supply  of 
poultry  and  eggs  and  butter  and  cheese  which  is  now  shipped  into  California  across 
half  the  continent  could  be  profitably  furnished  by  the  home  production.  She  can 
supply  her  own  people  and  still  have  surplus  for  export  in  her  Pacific  trade.  There 
ought  to  be  in  Yolo  County  50,000  acres  in  alfalfa  instead  of  5,000,  and  stock  enough 
to  consume  it. 

We  have  here  a  country  of  marvelous  possibilities,  a  soil  rich  in  all  the  elements 
of  plant  growth,  with  surface  smooth  and  easy  of  tillage,  a  climate  whose  summer 
heat  and  winter  cold  are  tempered  by  the  breezes  of  the  Pacific,  so  equable  that  here 
all  the  choicest  products  of  the  temperate  zone  and  of  the  subtropics  are  grown  alike 
in  perfection.  Here  nourish  side  by  side  the  apple,  the  peach,  the  pear,  the  plum, 
the  apricot,  and  grape,  along  with  the  orange,  the  lemon,  the  lime,  and  the  fig.  Here 
the  oak  and  the  pine,  there  the  palm  and  the  pepper  tree.  The  roses  bloom  winter 
and  summer.  The  orange  carries  its  fruit  through  the  winter,  the  oleander  is  a  tree 
and  the  heliotrope  a  hardy  shrub. 

As  if  to  crown  her  good  gifts  to  this  favored  country,  during  the  season  of 
harvest  and  fruitage  nature  sends  a  cloudless  sky.  The  grain,  ripe  for  the  sickle, 
may  stand  uninjured  for  months  waiting  the  tmsy  harvester.  The  warmth  and  light 
develop  rich  juices  and  exquisite  coloring  of  flower  and  fruit  and  a  wealth  of  bloom 
and  perfume  unknown  in  the  Eastern  climate.  Without  rain,  the  curing  of  forage  is 
attended  Avith  none  of  the  uncertainty  and  anxiety  that  attends  this  work  in  countries 
where  the  rain  ma}-  come  at  all  seasons.  The  advantage  of  the  clear  sky  is  especially 
seen  in  the  preparation  of  dried  fruits.  The  California  dried  fruits — the  peaches  and 


U.  S    Of, >t.  n<  Aer  .  Bui.  100,  Officr-  of 


PLATE  XVIIi. 


YOLO   COUNTY, 

I  FOR  IVI^k 


IRRIGATION    INVKSTIGATIONS    ON    CACHE    CREEK.  189 

prunes,  apricots  and  nectarines,  and  figs — arc  for  the  most  part  dried  in  the  sun. 
This  makes  possible  the  saving  of  much  defective  fruit,  and  affords  an  outlet  for  the 
sin-plus  which  can  not  be  canned  or  shipped  or  used  locally.  Indeed,  the  risks 
attending  this  method  of  dealing  with  the  fruit  arc  so  much  reduced  and  the  results 
so  satisfactory  that  many  of  the  larger  fruit  growers  dry  nearly  all  their  product. 
Unlike  the  fresh  fruit,  it  is  not  perishable,  and  the  risks  of  shipping  are  small. 
California  dried  fruit  is  staple  and  has  a  regular  quotable  value  in  the  markets  of  the 
world. 

If  in  this  favored  valley  health  or  needed  rest  call  for  change  of  climate  or 
scene,  within  easy  reach  on  the  west  is  the  bracing  air,  the  health-giving  springs,  and 
all  the  wealth  of  scenic  beauty  for  which  the  Coast  Range  is  so  justly  famed.  To  the 
north  the  snows  and  the  mountains  of  Shasta;  to  the  east  the  wild  and  rugged  Sierras, 
with  all  their  attractions  of  lake  and  forest  and  crag  and  stream;  to  the  south  the 
ocean  beach,  with  its  moist  and  cooling  breezes.  All  these  to  choose  from  and  within 
easy  reach  of  even  slender  means. ' 

For  a  market  there  are  the  interior  and  coast  cities  and  the  lumbering  and 
mining  camps  of  the  Sierras  and  the  Coast  Range.  During  the  summer  the  Southern 
Pacific,  with  its  fruit  express,  taps  this  territory,  and  through  eastern  connections 
places  its  fresh  fruits  and  early  vegetables  on  all  the  markets  of  the  mining  States, 
the  Middle  West,  the  Central  States,  and  even  the  cities  of  the  Atlantic  seaboard  and 
Canada.  Later  in  the  season  over  the  same  great  highway  are  carried  the  less 
perishable  products  of  the  cannery  and  the  vineyard,  the  dried  fruits,  the  nuts,  and 
the  citrus  fruits  to  the  great  distributing  centers  of  the  East,  whence  they  find  a 
market  east  and  west,  north  and  south,  and  even  across  the  Atlantic.  •  Within  easy 
rail  and  water  communication  to  the  south  lies  San  Francisco,  the  great  commercial 
entrepot  of  the  Pacific  coast,  with  her  matchless  harbor,  on  whose  waters  might  ride 
in  safety  the  commercial  navies  of  the  world,  and  through  whose  Golden  Gate  is 
pouring  an  ever-swelling  tide  of  commerce  with  our  growing  Pacific  coast  cities  and 
with  Alaska,  Hawaii,  and  the  Philippines;  with  Mexico,  Central  America,  and  Peru; 
with  Australia  and  New  Zealand;  with  Russia;  with  India,  China,  and  Japan,  and  with 
all  the  countless  islands  of  the  Pacific  and  the  eastern  seas.  With  generous  soil  and 
favoring  climate  and  the  world  for  a  market,  this  is  indeed  a  favored  land. 

DEFINITIONS  OF  TITLES  TO  WATER. 

The  farmers  of  Sacramento  Valley  under  the  existing  system  are  exhausting  the 
fertility  of  their  lands  and  wasting  their  substance  in  a  failing  system  of  agriculture, 
while  the  waters  that  should  make  their  thirstj'  fields  fruitful  and  themselves  and 
their  families  comfortable  and  prosperous  go  idly  by  to  trouble  the  lower  lying 
lands  and  to  breed  malaria  in  the  swamp.  These  farmers  have  a  right  to  the  use  of 
the  water,  and  they  should  know  the  limit  of  its  appropriation.  It  is  clearly  the  duty 
of  the  State  to  provide — 

First,  for  a  clear  definition  of  every  beneficial  use  now  made  of  these  waters; 
second,  to  make  clear  the  limit  of  riparian  rights;  third,  to  provide  for  the  determi- 
nation of  what  waters  remain  unused;  fourth,  to  provide  for  regulation  and  control 
when  new  appropriations  are  sought;  fifth,  to  provide  a  complete  record  of  each 
perfected  right  and  of  each  application  or  permit  for  a  new  diversion  or  use;  sixth, 


190  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

to  provide  an  efficient  administrative  .system,  adequate  for  the  proper  distribution  of 
the  water  to  those  entitled  to  its  use. 

For  the  denning  of  existing  rights  the  machinery  and  methods  of  the  ordinary 
court  are  not  fitted.  With  all  the  thirty  years  of  litigation  over  Cache  Creek  claims, 
nothing  has  been  accomplished  except  to  render  impossible  the  use  of  water.  The 
injunction  works  while  the  court  sleeps. 

The  tribunal  that  deals  with  this  matter  adequately  and  finally  must  take  account 
of  physical  laws  as  well  as  statute  and  precedent.  It  must  have  all  the  necessary 
appliances  for  securing,  of  its  own  motion  if  necessary,  accurate  and  reliable  knowl- 
edge of  the  capacities  of  ditches,  the  uses  made  of  the  water,  and  all  other  physical 
data  needed  for  determining  fully  the  amount  and  character  of  an  appropriation. 

The  court  that  fixed  the  volume  of  the  water  appropriated  by  the  Moore  Ditch 
at  432  cubic  feet  per  second  did  not,  and  probably  could  not,  know  that  the  passage 
of  that  volume  of  water  through  the  ditch  was  a  physical  impossibility,  or  that  even 
half  of  it  would  have  hopelessly  wrecked  the  works,  but  the  decision  stands  approved 
by  the  highest  court  of  the  State. 

The  custom  has  been  to  treat  a  controversy  of  this  nature  as  a  private  matter,  in 
which  only  the  parties  to  the  controversy  are  interested.  But  the  adjudication  of  a 
right  on  a  stream  in  an  arid  country  is  a  public  matter,  affecting  the  rights  of  every 
other  claimant  on  the  stream,  and  the  tribunal  fixing  the  limits  of  any  appropriation 
should  have  at  its  hand  full  information  concerning  each  claim  on  the  stream  and 
full  knowledge  of  the  capacity  of  the  stream  to  supply  the  demands  made.  A  right 
can  not  be  adequately  determined  without  full  consideration  of  all  other  existing 
rights,  and  when  once  fixed  should  be  clearly  defined  as  against  every  other  conflcting 
claim.  Until  an  adjudication  means  this  it  means  nothing. 

The  limits  of  the  riparian  rights  must  be  more  clearly  defined.  As  the  matter 
now  stands,  it  may  mean  anything.  In  departing  from  the  broad  principle  that  courts 
should  be  governed  in  their  interpretation  of  law  by  the  natural  conditions  and 
necessities  growing  out  of  the  environment  of  the  people  who  make  the  courts,  we 
have  been  led  into  a  maze  of  hopeless  absurdities.  Moore  claims  water  as  a  riparian 
owner,  to  be  used  on  lands  clearly  not  riparian.  The  owners  of  the  Capay  Ditch,  with 
lands  stretching  for  miles  away  from  the  stream,  claim  that  it  is  all  riparian.  The 
man  with  20  acres  on  the  stream  thinks  the  right  belongs  to  him,  and  not  to  his 
neighbor  10  rods  away.  Until  some  definite,  reasonable  limitation  is  placed  on  this 
right  there  can  be  no  certain  progress.  When  we  know  the  limits  of  the  right  its 
value  can  be  determined,  and  then  if  it  stands  in  the  way  of  progress  it  can  be 
condemned,  or  purchased  and  paid  for. 

The  determination  of  the  amount  of  water  available  for  new  uses  is  an  exceedingly 
important  matter.  If  all  the  water  in  a  stream  has  been  utilized  it  is  just  that  the 
appropriator  and  the  would-be  appropriator  should  be  apprised  of  the  fact,  and  it  is 
not  right  that  the  homes  of  those  who  have  used  the  water  should  be  jeopardized  by 
a  new  use.  Either  the  new  claimant  must  fail  or  the  old  must  suffer  and  both  be 
involved  in  controversy.  If  there  is  unused  water,  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should 
not  be  officially  known  and  the  conditions  set  forth  under  which  it  can  be  secured. 
This  determination  of  the  amount  of  unappropriated  water  is  not  a  simple  problem; 
it  requires  a  full  knowledge  of  the  regime  of  the  stream  at  all  seasons,  full  information 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   ON    CACHE    CREEK.  191 

as  to  all  the  uses  to  which  the  water  is  now  applied,  and  large  experience  in  its  use 
on  different  soils  and  under  different  conditions. 

No  new  appropriation  should  be  ever  permitted  until  it  has  been  considered  by 
competent  authority.  The  tribunal  defining  the  old  claims  would  be  admirably  fitted 
to  pass  upon  the  new.  The  amount  and  character  of  the  diversion  proposed  and  its 
effect  upon  other  established  appropriations  should  all  receive  careful  consideration, 
and  the  permit,  if  issued,  should  contain  such  limitations  as  will  effectually  guard 
against  unlawful  interference  with  the  prior  users. 

The  record  should  show  the  location,  use  to  which  applied,  the  volume  and  the 
priority  of  the  appropriations  from  every  stream  and  in  every  watershed  in  the  State. 
The  records  should  bo  in  a  central  office,  and  be  so  systematized  that  information 
desired  concerning  any  claim  or  any  stream  in  the  State  could  be  given  at  once. 
With  such  a  record,  a  letter  addressed  to  the  official  in  charge  would  bring  back 
complete  information  as  to  the  standing  of  any  claim  or  the  conditions  on  any 
stream. 

But  all  this  is  only  preliminary.  Last  and  most  important  of  all  is  the  distribution 
of  the  water  to  the  claimants  in  accordance  with  the  adjudication  and  the  record. 
For  this  an  efficient  administrative  system  will  be  needed.  The  executive  officers 
should  be  in  charge  of  the  record  and  be  provided  with  efficient  assistants  in  the 
various  watersheds.  To  this  department  all  complaints  in  regard  to  the  use  of  water 
should  'be  referred.  This  would  secure  prompt  action  and  the  distribution  of  water 
to  the  party  legally  entitled  to  its  use. 

With  rights  defined  and  full  protection  assured  for  all  beneficial  uses  of  water 
and  an  efficient  and  prompt  distribution  to  the  rightful  users,  there  is  no  reason  why 
the  waters  of  Cache  Creek  and  Clear  Lake  should  longer  run  to  waste.  With  the 
facilities  for  storage  at  minimum  cost  and  the  unlimited  opportunities  for  the 
development  of  power,  Lake  County  has  at  her  hand  the  opportunity  of  easy  and 
direct  communication  by  rail  and  water  with  the  outside  world.  This  would  bring  an 
easy  market  and  increased  population  to  her  borders  and  the  development  of  all  her 
agricultural  and  horticultural  resources.  The  advantages  of  Lake  County  as  a  sani- 
tarium and  pleasure  resort  and  as  a  region  for  picturesque  homes  can  never  be  fully 
realized  without  easier  means  of  transportation.  Cache  Creek  and  Clear  Lake  have 
in  them  the  solution  of  this  problem.  Nor  would  the  uses  for  power  cease  with  Lake 
County.  In  Rumsey  and  down  Capay  Valley  and  along  the  foothills  bordering  the 
Sacramento  Valley  there  are  abundant  opportunities  for  the  use  of  power  in  putting 
into  more  concentrated  form  the  products  of  this  rich  farming  country,  in  lighting 
towns,  furnishing  power  for  shops,  pumping  water  for  the  irrigation  of  arid  lands, 
the  reclamation  of  swamps,  and  innumerable  other  uses— all  these  without  interfering 
with  the  use  of  the  water  for  irrigation  or  abating  its  value  in  developing  the  unparal- 
leled agricultural  and  horticultural  possibilities  of  this  wonderful  soil  and  climate. 

With  proper  conservation  and  distribution  of  the  waters  that  now  go  to  waste  in 
Cache  Creek  and  such  subdivision  of  the  lands  as  would  make  possible  even  a 
moderate  realization  of  her  great  natural  resources,  Yolo  County  ought  to  furnish 
independent  homes  and  maintain  in  comfort  and  with  much  of  luxury  a  rural 
population  of  many  times  what  she  now  supports  and  make  of  each  of  her  towns 
a  thriving  center  of  trade  and  manufacture  and  of  social  and  intellectual  life. 


REPORT  OX  IRRIGATION  PROBLEMS  IN  THE  SALINAS  VALLEY. 

By  CHARLES  D.  MAKX, 
Professor  of  Civil  Engineering  in  Leland  Stanford  Junior  University. 

IRRIGATION  PROBLEMS  IN  THE  SALINAS  VALLEY. 

Irrigation  was  practiced  in  the  Salinas  Valley  by  the  mission  fathers  as  early  as 
1791,  and  truces  of  an  old  irrigation  ditch  belonging  to  the  Mission  Soledad  exist 
to  this  day. 

This  early  beginning  of  irrigation,  however,  led  to  no  development.  With  the 
secularization  of  the  missions  in  1833  and  their  subsequent  decay,  the  disappearance 
of  most  of  the  irrigation  works  went  hand  in  hand.  This  was  due  in  a  large  measure 
to  the  fact  that  California  was  a  grazing  and  not  an  agricultural  country.  The 
discovery  of  gold  checked  for  a  time"  the  natural  transition  from  the  range  to  the 
grain  farm,  and  from  the  latter  to  diversified  farming.  In  the  Salinas  Valley  the 
change  has  certainly  been  a  slow  one,  and  the  irrigation  development  has  been  cor- 
respondingly slow.  This  is  fortunate  for  the  inhabitants  of  this  fertile  valley, 
because  they  will  be  able  to  profit  by  the  mistakes  made  by  the  irrigators  in  other 
parts  of  California;  that  is,  if  the  recommendations  made  by  the  engineers  who  have 
studied  California  irrigation  conditions  are  carried  out. 

The  Salinas  Valley  lies  largely  in  Monterey  County,  though  some  of  the  tribu- 
taries of  the  Salinas  River  pass  through  portions  of  San  Luis  Obispo  and  San  Benito 
counties.  More  than  100  miles  in  length  and  from  3  to  15  miles  wide,  the  Salinas 
Valley  slopes  slightly  from  the  Gabilan  Mountains  on  the  east  and  the  Santa  Lucia 
Mountains  on  the  west  to  the  Salinas  River.  The  river,  with  its  tributaries,  has  a 
total  drainage  area  of  4,940  square  miles,  divided  as  follows: 

Drainage  area  of  the  Salinas  River  and  its  tributaries.1 

Square  miles. 

Salinas  River  direct 1, 956 

San  Lorenzo  River 282 

Arroyo  Seco  River 291 

San  Antonio  River 342 

Naeimiento  River 394 

Estrella  River 1,675 


Total  area 4, 940 


1  Thene  areas  are  the  actual  areas  tributary  to  the  Salinas  River.     In  part  of  it  the  run  off  does 
not  reach  the  river. 

23856— No.  100—01 13  193 


194  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  mean  annual  rainfall  at  several  stations  in  the  valley  is  given  below.  The 
table  is  made  up  from  records  furnished  by  the  chief  engineer  of  the  Southern 

Pacific  Railroad: 

Mean  annual  rniiifnJI  in  ftnlinttit  IW/n/.  v 

Inches. 

Pajaro 1 19. 24 

Castroville 2 16.  58 

Salinas '  13.  55 

Soledad '  8.  82 

Kings  City 3 10. 34 

San  Ardo 3 10. 36 

San  Miguel '. 3 10.  22 

Paso  Robles 3 14. 89 

Templeton 3 16. 68 

Santa  Margarita 2  24.  23 

This  rainfall  was  until  recently  considered  sufficient  for  agriculture.  Not  many 
years  ago  it  was  written:  "It  is  the  absence  of  droughts  which  distinguishes  the 
Salinas  Valley  from  other  sections  of  the  State  where  irrigation  is  required  to  insure 
crops."  This  view  is  no  longer  held.  Two  successive  dry  years  have  seriously 
injured  the  cattle  industry,  and  in  many  sections  of  the  valley  the  grain  crops,  too, 
have  been  a  failure.  In  ordinary  years  the  total  rainfall  is  sufficient  to  produce 
crops,  yet  its  distribution  is  such  that  to  insure  crops  for  the  future  irrigation  will 
have  to  be  resorted  to. 

The  following  summary  shows  the  monthly  mean  rainfall  at  Salinas,  as  reported 
by  the  U.  S.  Weather  Bureau: 

Monthly  mean  rainfall  at  Salinas,  Col.,  1872-1899. 

Inches. 

January 2. 92 

February 2. 22 

March 2.29 

April 1 1.20 

May 45 

June 14 

July 00 

August .02 

September 16 

October 72 

November 1.  30 

December 2. 52 

In  the  twenty-seven  years  covered  by  the  summary  no  rain  has  fallen  in  July, 
and  the  rainfall  from  May  to  September  is  hardly  appreciable.  With  such  a  distribu- 
tion of  rainfall  any  but  the  most  primitive  forms  of  agriculture  are  impossible.  This 
fact  was  recognized  by  Messrs.  Brandenstein  and  Godchaux,  who  in  1884  organized 
the  San  Bernardo  and  Salinas  Valley  Canal  and  Irrigating  Company.  The  lack  of 
success  of  this  scheme,  though  attributable  to  various  causes,  is  in  a  measure  due 
to  the  lack  of.  appreciation  of  the  value  of  irrigation  on  the  part  of  the  farmers. 
Mr.  Brandenstein  stated  that  as  a  rule  men  preferred  to  wait  and  take  their  chances 
on  possible  rains  to  the  doing  of  any  work  which  might  prove  superfluous.  The 

1  Mean  of  27  years.  ''  Mean  of  12  years.  8  Mean  of  14  years. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    IN    SALINAS    VALLEY.  195 

necessity  of  irrigation,  however,  is  now  recognized  by  the  intelligent  and  progress- 
ive farmers  of  the  Salinas  Valley,  and  the  waters  of  the  Salinas  River  and  its 
tributaries  will  not  be  allowed  to  run  to  waste  in  the  future  as  in  the  past. 

The  volume  of  water  carried  by  the  river  corresponds  in  general  to  the  amount 
of  rainfall — a  torrent  in  winter,  it  almost  dries  up  in  summer — and  to  make  the 
best  use  of  it  storage  is  necessary.  The  extent  to  which  this  is  practicable  will  be 
determined  by  the  results  of  the  reconnaissance  survey  for  storage  reservoirs  carried 
on  by  the  hydrographic  division  of  the  U.  S.  Geological  Survey  last  summer. 

CLAIMS  TO  THE  WATERS  OF  SALINAS  RIVER  AND  ITS  TRIBUTARIES. 

In  many  cases  the  recognition  of  the  value  of  irrigation  shows  itself  only  in 
the  filing  of  a  claim  for  water,  since  there  is  a  large  discrepancy  between  recorded 
claims  and  projects  actually  carried  out.  The  records  of  Monterey  County  show 
that  70  claims  to  the  water  of  Salinas  River  and  its  tributaries  have  been  filed.  Most 
of  these  filings  make  an  attempt  to  comply  with  the  statutory  requirements  as  to 
giving  amount  claimed,  point  of  diversion,  dimensions  of  ditch,  and  the  proposed 
use  to  which  the  water  is  to  be  put.  But  they  fulfill  the  requirements  in  form 
only.  In  many  of  the  claims  there  is  an  attempt  to  make  the  area  of  the  cross 
section  of  the  proposed  ditch  in  inches  approximate  the  number  of  "inches"  of 
water  claimed,  but  in  others  it  is  hard  to  tell  what  dictated  the  dimensions  for 
these  ditches.  The  Salinas  Valley  Water  Company  in  one  filing  claims  "50,000 
inches  under  a  4-inch  pressure"  to  be  diverted  by  means  of  a  ditch  30  feet  wide, 
on  top,  20  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  5  feet  deep.  Five  months  later  the  same 
company  claimed  16,000  inches  to  be  diverted  by  means  of  a  ditch  40  feet  wide 
on  top  and  35  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  5  feet  deep.  In  the  latter  case  the 
quantity  claimed  is  less  than  one-third  of  that  formerly  claimed,  and  the  ditch  is  a 
half  larger.  There  are  two  claims  filed  within  three  days  of  each  other  for  2,500 
inches,  under  a  4-inch  pressure.  In  the  first  case  the  water  was  to  be  diverted 
through  a  ditch  25  feet  wide  on  the  bottom  and  4  feet  deep.  The  other  claimant's 
ditch  was  to  be  2  feet  wide  and  2  feet  deep.  Another  filing  claims  6  inches  of  water 
under  a  4-inch  pressure,  to  be  diverted  through  a  ditch  12  inches  wide  on  top,  8 
inches  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  10  inches  deep.  This  ditch  is  large  enough  to  carry 
about  100  inches  as  their  capacity  is  usually  estimated. 

Presumably  not  more  than  ten  of  these  seventy  filings  have  been  followed  by 
actual  appropriations,  and  even  in  these  cases  the  amount  claimed  is  in  almost  every 
instance  much  beyond  the  amount  actually  used  or  the  capacity  of  both  headworks 
and  ditches.  Many  of  the  filings  represent  the  same  claim  and  are  repeated  often 
enough  to  keep  the  claim  alive  until  the  claimants  are  able  to  build  their  works  or 
give  up  their  plans. 


196 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


The  following  table  is  a  summary  of  the  claims  to  the  Salinas  River  and  its 
tributaries,  omitting  duplicates: 

Summary  of  claims  to  the  waters  of  Salinas  River  and  its  tributaries,  filed  in  Morterey  County,  Cal. 

SALINAS  RIVER. 


Name  of  claimant. 


Date 
recorded. 


Inches 
claimed. 


Harma,  Rob  F Oct.    16,1877  154 

Kopman,  Frank Oct.    18,1877  144 

Brandenstein,  M Dec.  15,1882  60,000 

Gould,  B.  F.,  andBriggs,  N.  C Mar.  14,1893  50,000 

Gould,  B.  F May  27, 1895  3, 000 

Brown,  W.  K.  (Salinas  Valley  L.  and  W.  Co.) May     9,1896  50,000 

Hartenbower,  J.  E.,  and  Hurd,  B.  D July     3,1896  j  45,000 

Armstrongs Aug.  19,1896  1,000 

Spreckels  Sugar  Co Sept.  13, 1898  15, 000 

Do Feb.  25,  is'.ni  2,000 

Somavia,  J.  G May  18,1899  80 

Gonzales  Water  Co Sept.  18,1899  16,000 

Gordon,  W.  A , Oct.    23,1899  5,000 

Total 237,378 

ARROYO  SECO. 

Brown,  J.  H.,  and  Armstrong,  W.T Oct.  20,1886  10,000 

Abbott,  E.  K Apr.  13,1895  1,000 

Hall,  E.  E Apr.  29,1896  10,000 

Abbott,  C.  S May  6,1896  3,500 

Burbank,  A.  L.,  and  Abbott,  C.  S July  11, 1896  30, 000 

Salinas  Valley  Water  Co July  17, 1897  50, 000 

Do Dec.  22,1897  50,000 

Wood,  Wm.  P Aug.  17,1900  50,000 

Do do SO 

Total 204.550 

SAN  LORENZO. 

Abbott,  C.  S.,  and  Boswell,  S.  B Jan.     7,1878  3,000 

Brown,  W.  K Aug.  26,1895  '  2,600 

Brown,  John Nov.    2,1895  6,000 

Total -' 11,500 

SAN   ANTONIO. 

Millard,  I.  H Sept.  27,1898  10,000 


Unfortunately  we  have  no  stream-flow  data  from  the  Salinas  River.  It  is,  how- 
ever, certain  that  the  filings  on  it  aggregating  237,378  miner's  inches  or  4,748  cubic 
feet  per  second  are  in  excess  even  of  its  flood  flow.  The  same  may  be  said  of  its 
tributaries.  On  the  Arroyo  Seco  we  find  claims,  eliminating  as  above  all  duplica- 
tions and  refilings,  for  204,550  inches  or  4,091  cubic  feet  per  second,  on  the  San 
Lorenzo  11,500  inches  or  230  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  on  the  San  Antonio  for 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    IN    SALINAS    VALLEY. 


197 


10,000  inches  or  200  cubic1  feet  per  second.  An  examination  of  all  existing  works  on 
the  Salinas  and  its  tributaries  shows  that  the  actual  capacity  of  the  works  having 
tilings  for  taking  water  is  about  as  given  below.  The  total  claims  on  each  stream  are 
repeated  here  for  comparison: 

Claims  to  Salinas  River  and  trilmtaries  and  capacity  of  diverting  works. 


Stream. 

Capacity  of  canals. 

Claims. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Cubic 
feet  per 
second. 

Miner's 
inches. 

Cubic 
feet  per 

scronil. 

Salina 
Arroyc 
SanLc 

Sun  Ai 

64,665 
23,350 
34,375 

(0) 

1,293.5 
467.0 
687.6 

237,  378 
204,550 
11,500 
10,000 

4,748 
4,091 
230 
200 

a  Slight,  not  determinable. 

The  San  Lorenzo  is  the  only  stream  on  which  the  filings  are  not  in  excess  of  the 
ditch  capacity,  and  where  on  a  single  day  the  flood  flow  has  been  in  excess  of  the  filings. 
The  information  on  this  point  was  obtained  through  the  courtesy  of  Mr.  Morse,  from 
the  Spreckels  Sugar  Compan}'.  Mr.  Morse  had  some  determinations  of  the  storm 
flow  of  San  Lorenzo  Creek  made  by  Mr.  Thompson,  C.  E.,  and  supplemented  these 
latter  by  gage  readings  on  which  approximate  discharge  calculations  were  based. 
On  January  3,  1900,  San  Lorenzo  Creek  is  said  to  have  had  a  flood  flow  of  900  cubic 
feet  per  second. 

The  determination  of  the  actual  carrying  capacity  of  existing  works,  except  in 
the  case  of  two  pumping  plants,  had  to  be  based  on  calculations,  since  no  water  was 
running  through  the  ditches  which  take  water  by  gravity  from  the  Salinas  and  its 
tributaries  when  the  examination  was  made.  It  is  the  intention  to  substitute  the 
results  of  actual  gagings  if  they  can  be  made  this  coming  spring. 

From  what  has  been  said  regarding  the  claims  to  the  waters  of  this  river  and  its 
tributaries,  it  is  apparent  that  the  present  method  of  recording  water  claims  is  unsat- 
isfactory, and  is  apt  to  work  injury  to  everyone  concerned.  Under  existing  rulings 
"evidence  as  to  the  capacity  of  the  flume  and  the  amount  of  water  used  is  evidence 
of  appropriation,''  so  that  the  amount  claimed  in  the  filing  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
matter.  Again,  the  point  of  diversion  may  be  changed,  if  others  are  not  injured  by 
the  change.  (San  Luis  Water  Co.  v.  Estrada,  117  Cal.,  168.)  There  is  no  method  of 
determining  whether  any  claim  has  been  made  good  except  by  field  examination;  and 
even  then  the  point  of  diversion  and  place  of  use  may  have  been  changed,  so  that  it 
may  not  be  possible  to  trace  a  ditch  back  to  the  claim  filed  by  its  owners.  This  con- 
fusion is  added  to  by  the  decisions  of  the  supreme  court,  that  the  effect  of  posting 
the  statutory  notice  and  filing  a  copy  of  the  same  is  merely  to  date  the  appropriation 
back  to  the  time  of  posting  the  notice,  and  that  an  appropriation  is  just  as  valid  if 
no  notice  is  posted.  (See  Burrows  v.  Burrows,  82  Cal.,  564,  cited  below.)  The 
people  of  the  Salinas  Valley  are  fortunate  in  that  the  court  records  of  Monterey  County 
as  yet  contain  but  few  water-right  cases,  and  it  is  hoped  that  some  better  method  of 
filing  and  proving  up  on  claims  will  he  devised  before  such  difficulties  arise. 


198  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATION:?    IX    CALIFORNIA. 

STOEAGE. 

It  has  before  been  stated  that  the  streams  of  the  valley  are  practically  torrential 
in  character,  and  that  to  make  their  waters  useful  throughout  the  year  the  floods 
must  be  stored.  Even  should  such  storage  be  possible  at  a  reasonable  outlay  per 
acre-foot  of  water,  there  is  no  legal  protection  to  the  builder  of  storage  reservoirs 
unless  the  rights  of  all  riparian  owners  below  the  point  of  storage  are  acquired. 

It  is  evident  from  what  has  been  stated  above  that  the  riparian  law  under  which 
water  cases  are  now  decided  is  a  serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of  irrigation  development. 
It  does  not  seem  that  anything  short  of  its  abolition  and  the  substitution  of  an  entirely 
different  law  can  bring  about  a  change  for  the  better. 

USE  OF  UNDERGROUND  WATERS. 

There  are  undoubtedly  many  parts  of  the  valley  for  which  irrigation  by  pumping 
from  subsurface  .sources  will  be  more  economical  than  the  construction  and  main- 
tenance of  long  and  large  ditch  lines,  with  the  resultant  large  losses  of  water  in 
transmission.  The  determination  of  the  existence  of  such  subsurface  sources  is 
therefore  of  great  importance,  and  Mr.  Nutter's  report  (see  Appendix,  p.  208)  shows 
the  extent  to  which  our  investigations  were  carried  in  this  direction. 

Irrigation  by  pumping  is  already  practiced  to  some  extent  in  the  Salinas  Valley. 
as  shown  in  detail  below.  As  pumping  plants  increase,  a  lowering  of  the  subsurface 
water  level  will  undoubtedly  take  place,  interference  of  new  wells  with  old  ones  will 
result,  and  lawsuits  will  follow.  There  are  at  present  no  methods  by  which  a  riling 
on  subsurface  water  can  be  made  unless  an  actual  stream  flowing  between  banks  can 
be  shown  to  exist.  It  certainly  seems  desirable  that  something  should  be  done  which 
will  protect  a  man  when  he  has  established  a  pumping  plant,  and  secure  to  him  the 
permanent  use  of  a  definite  amount  of  subsurface  water.  In  New  Hampshire  this 
rule  has  been  adopted  in  several  decisions:  "That  a  landowners  right  to  obstruct  or 
divert  oozing  or  percolating  water  is  limited  to  such  a  quantity  of  water  as  is  neces- 
sary for  the  reasonable  use  of  his  own  land."  That  ruling  raises  the  difficulty  of 
deciding  what  constitutes  "reasonable  use."  and  in  England,  as  well  as  in  most  Stute- 
of  the  Union,  this  difficulty  has  been  thought  so  great  by  the  jurists  deciding  water 
cases  that  they  have  declared  that  there  is  no  property  in  underground  water.  This 
whole  question  is  treated  in  an  admirable  manner  by  Lord  Robert  Cecil.  Q.  C.,  in 
a  paper  entitled  "The  law  of  underground  water.'1  published  in  the  Engineering 
Record  December  2.  1899.  He  say-: 

The  law  is  clear.  It  is  generally  true  that  all  that  lies  beneath  the  land  belongs  to  the  owner  of 
the  surface.  To  this  rule  water  is  the  exception.  There  is  no  property  in  underground  water.  But, 
on  the  other  hand,  each  owner  may  puinp  from  his  land  what  water  he  can  get,  with  two  exceptions: 
He  must  not  directly  or  indirectly  take  water  already  contained  in  a  surface  stream,  nor  must  he 
abstract  water  flowing  underground  in  a  known  and  definite  channel.  He  has  a  perfect  right  to  drain 
the  supplies  to  all  his  neighbors'  wells,  however  long  they  may  have  been  enjoyed  by  their  owners. 
So.  too,  he  may  pump  till  springs  miles  away  have  ceased  to  flow  and  threaten  to  become  swallow 
holes  for  the  streams  they  used  to  feed.  Further  than  this  he  may  not  go.  Once  water  is  in  the 
channel  of  a  stream,  above  or  under  ground,  it  is  safe  from  subterranean  depredators. 

This  is.  Lord  Cecil  believes,  the  law;  "  Whether  it  should  be  changed,  and  if  so, 
how,  is  another  story."  The  California  decisions  agree  with  the  law  as  laid  down 
above.  (Gould  *•.  Eaton,  111  Cal.,  639;  Hanson  r.  McCue.  i~2  Cal.,  303;  So.  Pac. 


IKKHiATHiN     1'HOHLKM*    IN    SALINAS    VALLKY.  199 

H.   K.   Co.   r.  Dufour,  !»5  Cal.,  615;  Vim-land  I  IT.  Dis.  v.  Azusa  Irr.  Co.,  126  Cal., 
486.)    There  exists,  therefore,  to-day  no  legal  protection  for  a  man  who  has  developed 

a  subsurface  supplv. 

DUTY  OF  WATER. 

If,  as  intimated  above,  an  attempt  is  made  to  legalize  subsurface  filings,  and 
even  for  existing  surface;  tilings,  it  will  be  necessary  to  determine  what  is  "reason- 
able use."  Iii  other  words,  the  duty  of  water,  i.  e.,  the  number  of  acres  which  1 
cubic  foot  per  second  flowing  constantly  for  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days  in 
the  year  can  irrigate,  must  be  determined.  One  cubic  foot  per  second  is  equal  to 
.;i.5:;n.<ioo  cubic  feet  per  year.  If  we  cover  1  acre,  or  43,560  square  feet,  with 
1  foot  of  water,  the  above  quantity  is  sufficient  to  cover  724  acres,  or  the  duty  of  1  cubic 
foot  per  second  would  )>e  said  to  be  724  acres.  If  we  put  2  feet  of  water  on  the  land, 
the  duty  of  1  cubic  foot  per  second  will  be  only  362  acres.  It  will  at  once  be  seen 
that  this  "duty  of  1  cubic  foot  per  second"  must  be  a  varying  quantity,  depending 
on  the  character  of  the  soil,  on  climatic  conditions,  on  kind  of  crop  raised,  on  greater 
or  less  skill  of  the  irrigator,  on  length  of  time  water  has  been  applied  for  irrigation  in 
the  vicinity,  on  subsurface  drainage  conditions,  and  many  more  factors.  Neverthe- 
less it  will  be  possible  in  any  given  section  of  the  State  to  determine  within  practical 
limits  what  may  be  considered  the  duty  of  1  cubic  foot  per  second  of  water  in  that 
section.  Investigations  in  the  Salinas  Valley  during  the  past  summer,  reported  below, 
>liow  that  this  clutv  runs  all  the  way  from  270  acres  to  1,448  acres.  Such  a  wide 
range  is  not  found  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State,  where  necessity  has  compelled 
an  economical  ase  of  water.  In  Sweetwater  Valley,  Pomona,  and  Ontario  the  duty 
of  1  cubic  foot  per  second  is  about  500  acres,  while  for  all  of  California  it  may  average 
not  over  200  acres.  A  careful  study  of  the  factors  mentioned  above  must  be  made  to 
determine  for  the  Salinas  Valley  what  constitutes  for  its  irrigators  a  "  reasonable 
u>e"  of  water  or  "duty,"  which  two  terms  ought  to  be  synonymous  from  the 

irrigator's  standpoint. 

METHODS  OF  DISTRIBUTION. 

As  irrigation  on  a  large  scale  in  the  Salinas  Valley  is  comparatively  recent, 
methods  of  distribution  are  still  crude.  No  special  care  is  taken  in  providing  the 
consumer  with  exactly  the  quantity  of  water  his  contract  calls  for.  As  yet  the  water 
companies  are  extremely  liberal  in  furnishing  the  "thorough"  irrigation  specified  in 
the  ordinance  fixing  rates.  The  following  ordinances  and  water  contract  show  the 
terms  on  which  water  is  distributed  in  the  Salinas  Valley: 

ORDINANCE  NO.  294. 

AN  ORDINANCE  to  regulate  and  establish  rates  to  be  charged  for  the  use  of  water  in  the  county  of  Monterey,  State  of 
California,  sold  by  the  Soledad  Land  and  Water  Company,  a  corporation. 

The  board  of  supervisors  of  Monterey  County  do  ordain  as  follows: 

SECTION  1.  The  Soledad  Land  and  Water  Company,  organized  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of 
California,  is  hereby  authorized  and  permitted  to  charge  and  receive  for  the  use  of  water  provided  by 
and  which  may  be  sold  by  it  in  Monterey  County,  State  of  California,  when  not  sold  within  the  limits 
of  any  incorporated  city  or  town  in  said  county,  the  following  tariff  rates  and  amounts : 


FOR   IRRIGATION. 


For  each  acre-inch  of  water  measured  at  a  weir  in  main  ditch  in  canal  nearest  and  above  the  land 
to  be  irrigated,  16jj  cents;  the  land  so  irrigated  to  be  first  placed  in  a  proper  condition  for  irrigation 
by  the  landowner  under  such  reasonable  rules  therefor  as  may  be  adopted  by  said  corporation. 


200  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

SEC.  2.  The  following  rules  are  hereby  established  for  use  of  said  water: 

First.  Said  company  shall  not  be  required  to  deliver  water  for  irrigation  of  lands  unless  said 
lands  are  in  proper  condition  to  receive  said  water  without  waste  or  loss  of  water.  Second.  Said  water 
shall  be  used  by  the  consumer  for  no  other  purpose  than  the  proper  irrigation  of  the  land  when 
purchased  for  said  purpose.  Third.  The  water  shall  not  be  used  or  turned  from  the  canal  for  irrigation 
or  for  any  purpose  by  a  consumer  without  first  making  application  to  the  company  or  its  agent  to 
divert  the  same,  nor  shall  said  company  be  compelled  to  sell  pr  deliver  water  to  anyone  indebted  to 
the  company  for  water  until  said  indebtedness  is  fully  paid,  and  from  any  delinquent  consumer  the 
company  may  require  payment  in  advance  of  the  delivery  of  any  water.  Fourth.  For  any  violation 
of  the  above  rules  during  the  time  of  its  delivery  the  water  may  be  shut  off  and  shall  not  be  turned  on 
again  without  satisfactory  assurance  of  an  intention  on  the  part  of  the  consumer  to  comply  with  the 
regulations  herein  stated. 

SEC.  3.  Nothing  in  this  ordinance  contained  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  or  invalidate  any 
contract  already  made,  or  which  shall  hereafter  be  made,  by  or  with  said  Soledad  Land  and  Water 
Company,  or  any  person,  company,  association,  or  corporation  having  or  to  have  appropriated  water 
for  sale,  rent,  or  distribution  in  Monterey  County,  relating  to  the  sale,  rental,  or  distribution  of  water, 
or  to  the  sale,  rental  of  easements,  and  servitude  of  the  right  to  the  flow  and  use  of  water,  nor  to 
prohibit  or  interfere  with  the  vesting  of  rights  under  any  such  contract. 

SEC.  4.  This  ordinance  shall  be  in  force  and  effect  immediately. 

OKDINANCE  NO.  296. ' 

AN  ORDINANCE  to  fix  and  regulate  the  maximum  rate  at  which  the  Spreckels  Sugar  Company,  a  corporation,  may  or 
shall  sell,  rent,  or  distribute  water  appropriated  by  said  Spreckels  Sugar  Company,  in  the  county  of  Monterey,  State 
of  California. 

The  board  of  supervisors  of  Monterey  County,  California,  do  ordain  as  follows: 

SECTION  1.  The  Spreckels  Sugar  Company,  a  corporation  organized  and  existing  under  and  by 
virtue  of  the  laws  of  the  State  of  California,  having  or  to  have  and  hereafter  appropriated  water  in  the 
county  of  Monterey,  State  of  California,  for  sale,  rental,  and  distribution,  is  hereby  authorized  to  sell, 
rent,  and  distribute  the  water  appropriated  by  said  Spreckels  Sugar  Company,  in  said  Monterey  County, 
when  not  sold  within  the  limits  of  any  incorporated  city  or  town  in  said  Monterey  County,  at  a 
maximum  rate  of  one  dollar  and  fifty  cents  per  acre  for  each  irrigation  of  each  and  every  acre  of  land 
irrigated  by  said  Spreckels  Sugar  Company,  the  irrigation  of  said  land  to  be  according  to  the  rules 
and  regulations  of  said  corporation. 

SEC.  2.  Nothing  in  this  ordinance  contained  shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  or  invalidate  any 
contract  already  made  or  which  shall  hereafter  be  made  by  or  with  the  said  Spreckels  Sugar  Company, 
or  any  person,  company,  association,  or  corporation  having  or  to  have  appropriated  water  for  sale, 
rental,  or  distribution  in  Monterey  County,  relating  to  the  sale,  rental,  or  distribution  of  water,  or  to 
the  sale  of  easements  or  servitudes  of  the  right  to  the  flow  and  use  of  water;  nor  to  prohibit  or  inter- 
fere with  the  vesting  of  rights  under  any  such  contract. 

SEC.  3.  This  ordinance  shall  be  in  force  and  effect  immediately. 

CONTRACT. 

To  the  Salinas  Valley  Water  Company,  Kings  City,  Cal. 

GENTLEMEN:  I  hereby  apply  to  your  company  for  water  to  irrigate  the  following-described  lands 
situated  in  Monterey  County,  California,  to  wit,  —  — ,  containing acres. 

I  agree  to  prepare  the  said  land  in  proper  manner  for  irrigation  (under  your  supervision)  and 
also  agree  to  use  the  water  with  all  reasonable  economy  and  at  the  time  or  times  when  you  shall 

furnish  same,  provided,  however,  that  you  furnish  it  between  the day  of  —     — ,  A.  D.  189-,  and 

the day  of — ,  A.  D.  189-;  and  I  agree  to  have  my  land  ready  to  irrigate  at  all  times  between 

said  dates;  and  I  agree  to  pay  the  sum  of  $ —  -  per  acre  for  the  said  land  to  the  said  company, 
provided  said  company  is  prepared  to  furnish  sufficient  water  to  properly  irrigate  said  lands  between 
said  dates. 

Signed,  sealed,  and  delivered  in  the  presence  of — 

-.     [Seal.] 

.     [Seal.] 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    IN    SALINAS    VALLEY.  201 

It  is  evident  tliat  transactions  based  on  such  vague  terms  can  not,  in  the  long  run, 
be  satisfactory  to  either  party.  Provision  must  be  made  in  the  Salinas  Valley,  as 
elsewhere,  for  a  form  of  contract  under  which  payment  is  made  for  the  quantity  of 
water  used,  and  under  which  contract  the  quantity  must  be  actually  measured  out  to 
the  consumer  in  some  reasonably  accurate  manner.  The  tenants  of  the  Spreckels 
Sugar  Company  are  not  charged  for  water  that  runs  through  the  factory,  but  they 
are  charged  $1.50  per  acre  when  the  water  has  to  be  pumped  directly  for  irrigation. 

IRRIGATION  IN  THE  SALINAS  VALLEY. 

Below  are  given  abstracts  of  statements  made  by  the  owners  of  irrigation  plants 
in  the  Salinas  Valley: 

Henry  Bartlin.  Lot  S,  Cocks  Tract  Rancho.  Two  10-inch  wells,  20  feet  apart,  190  and  196  feet 
deep.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  20  to  22  feet.  Pump,  8-inch  centrifugal.  Irrigates  by  flooding 
(i  inches  deep.  Checks,  60  by  70  yards.  Irrigated  45  acres  of  alfalfa  at  a  cost  of  $2  per  acre.  Irrigates 
after  each  crop.  Soil,  sediment  and  sandy  loam.  Surface  water  at  6  feet.  Does  not  know  whether  it 
pays  or  not. 

J.  G.  Armstrong.  On  E.  J  of  the  SB.  J  of  sec.  26,  T.  14  S.,  B.  2  E.,  M.  D.  M.  Two  10-inch  wells, 
197  feet  deep,  water  rising  to  within  1.5  feet  of  surface  of  the  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level 
12  to  14  feet.  Gravel  at  115  feet.  Pump,  8-inch  centrifugal,  throwing  2,000  gallons  per  minute.  Irri- 
gates by  Hooding  8  inches  deep.  Irrigated  80  acres  of  alfalfa  for  self  and  300  acres  for  neighbors,  at  a 
cost  of  $1  per  acre.  Soil,  sediment  and  sandy  loam.  Ditch,  2  feet  on  bottom,  4  feet  on  top,  and  3  feet 
deep.  Surface  water  at  ti  feet. 

On  lot  5,  Las  Salinas  Rancho.  From  river.  Pump,  10-inch  centrifugal.  Irrigated  70  acres  of 
alfalfa  and  rye  grass. 

At  dairy  on  the  Monterey  City  lands.  Four  10-inch  wells.  Pump,  6-inch  centrifugal.  Irrigated 
90  acres.  Land  doubled  in  value.  "Money  in  it." 

Frank  MeFadden.  El  Tucho  Rancho.  Two  sets  of  10-inch  wells.  First  set  178  and  187  feet 
deep,  water  rising  to  within  5  feet  of  surface  of  ground;  second  set  194  and  196  feet  deep,  water  rising 
to  within  7  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  14  to  15  feet.  Pump,  8-inch  centrifugal, 
throwing  1,500  gallons  per  minute.  Irrigates  by  flooding  6  to  8  inches  deep.  Irrigated  20  acres  of 
alfalfa.  Can  irrigate  365  acres  of  farming  land.  Good  irrigation  lasts  two  years.  Cost,  $3  per  acre. 
Soil,  sediment  and  sandy  loam.  Surface  water  at  14  feet.  Increase  of  value  of  land,  25  per  cent. 

S.  M.  Black.  On  sec.  22,  T.  14  S.,  R.  2  E.,  M.  D.  M.  Two  10-inch  wells  25  feet  apart,  203  feet 
deep,  water  rising  to  within  7  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  12  feet.  Surface 
water  at  17  feet;  lirst  water  at  161  feet.  Water-bearing  gravel  from  180  to  203  feet.  Pump,  8-inch, 
throwing  1,600  to  1,700  gallons  per  minute.  Irrigated  50  acres  of  beets  and  60  acres  of  summer  crop 
at  a  cost  of  $3.50  per  acre.  Irrigates  4J  acres  in  twelve  hours,  wetting  ground  4  feet  deep.  Soil, 
sediment  and  sandy  loam.  Increase  of  value  of  land,  25  per  cent.  Increases  crop  two  or  three  times. 
"Good  thing." 

Breschini.  Las  Salinas  Rancho.  From  river.  Pump,  5-inch,  running  at  500  revolutions  per 
minute.  Irrigated  500  acres  of  alfalfa,  using  canvas  hose  and  allowing  water  to  flow  over  the  land. 
Results  very  poor. 

Benjamin  Hitchcock.  Lot  42,  Nacional  Rancho.  Two  10-inch  wells  200  feet  deep,  water  rising 
to  within  16  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  15  feet.  Thirty  to  35  feet  of  gravel. 
Pump,  8-inch,  throwing  1,500  to  1,700  gallons  per  minute.  Irrigated  35  acres  of  summer  crop,  35  acres 
of  standing  grain  (result  poor),  15  acres  grain  by  flooding;  water  6  inches  deep.  .Whole  ranch  can  be 
irrigated.  Cost,  $2.50  per  acre.  Irrigated  eighteen  days.  Soil,  adobe  and  sandy  loam.  Increase  in 
value  of  land,  25  per  cent. 

H.  L.  Davis.  Lota  46,  47,  and  48,  Nacional  Rancho.  Two  10-inch  wells,  150  and  151  feet  deep; 
water  rising  to  within  10  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  surface  4  feet.  Pump, 
8-inch,  throwing  2,000  gallons  per  minute.  Irrigated  387  acres  of  beets  and  potatoes  20  inches  deep 
in  3.5  months,  at  a  cost  of  ¥3  per  acre.  Soil,  sediment  and  sandy  loam.  Increase  in  value  of  land,  25 
per  cent. 


202  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

John  Daugherty.  Lot  37,  Nacional  Rancho.  One  7-inch  well,  176  feet  deep;  water  rising  to 
within  6  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  9  feet.  Pump,  4-inch  centrifugal. 
Irrigated  20  acres  of  alfalfa  6  inches  deep  in  six  weeks.  Soil,  adobe. 

C.  E.  Brown.  Lot  1,  Buena  Vista  Rancho.  From  river.  Pump,  8-inch,  throwing  2,000  gallons 
per  minute.  Eighteen-horsepower  engine,  burning  wood.  Irrigated  12  acres  of  alfalfa  and  13  acres 
of  potatoes,  6  acres  a  day  8  inches  deep,  at  a  cost  of  $3  per  day  for  fuel,  running  engine  himself. 
Bottom  land. 

Thomas  Chappel.  Lot  11,  Guadalupe  Rancho.  Two  10-inch  wells,  126  feet  deep;  water  rising 
to  within  8  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  10  feet.  Pump,  8-inch  centrifugal, 
throwing  1,500  to  2,000  gallons  per  minute.  Irrigated  85  acres  6  inches  deep.  Checks  and  hose.  Cost, 
$7  or  $8  per  acre.  Can  irrigate  250  acres  of  land.  Soil,  sandy  loam.  Increase  in  value  of  land,  25  per 
cent. 

Miller.  On  Ignacio  Malarin  place,  Guadalnpe  Rancho.  Two  10-inch  wells,  125  and  130  feet  deep; 
water  rising  to  within  6  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  13  feet.  Pump,  8-inch 
centrifugal.  Irrigated  60  acres  of  alfalfa  6  inches  deep  in  about  forty-five  days,  at  a  cost  of  $2.50  per 
acre.  Soil,  sandy  loam. 

From  river.     Same  pump  irrigated  3  or  4  acres  in  four  days. 

Salvation  Army  Colony.  Lot  4,  Soledad  Rancho.  From  river.  Pump,  16-inch  centrifugal, 
throwing  8,000  gallons  per  minute.  Eighty-horsepower  Frick  engine.  Irrigated  200  acres  for  three 
months  2  to  12  inches  deep.  Irrigated  8  acres  in  twelve  hours.  Burn  3  cords  of  green  wood,  cost 
$3.75  per  cord;  1}  cords  dry  wood  give  same  amount  of  steam.  Ordinary  run,  5,000  gallons  per  min- 
ute. Capacity,  10,000  gallons  per  minute,  but  flume  can  not  carry.  Actual  flow,  measured  in  flume 
July  27,  4,940  gallons  per  minute.  Suction,  14.5  feet.  Can  irrigate  300  acres  more.  Soil,  sandy  loam. 
Practically  no  crops  for  last  seven  years.  This  year  good  crops  where  water  has  been  put  on.  Ditches 
4  feet  on  bottom,  6  feet  on  top,  and  3  feet  deep;  fall,  1  to  1,000. 

Soledad  Land  and  Water  Company.  Lot  3,  Soledad  Rancho.  From  river.  Delivered  at  pump 
by  ditch.  One  20-inch  Krogh  centrifugal  pump,  throwing  10,000  gallons  per  minute,  with  a  15-foot 
lift.  Irrigated  650  acres  in  seventy  days  of  eleven  hours  12  inches  deep.  Have  irrigated  for  five  sea- 
sons. Practically  whole  tract  can  be  irrigated.  Charge,  $1.50  for  9  acre-inches.  Soil,  sandy  loam. 
Ditches  6  feet  on  bottom,  9  feet  on  top,  and  3  feet  deep;  fall,  1  to  1,000. 

Gonzales  Water  Company.  From  river.  Ditch  at  mouth  30  feet  on  bottom,  40  feet  on  top,  and 
6  feet  deep.  Drops  to  25  feet  on  bottom,  35  feet  on  top,  and  6  feet  deep;  fall,  1  to  5,000.  Seven  miles 
of  ditch  (main).  Irrigated  for  A.  Gonzales  1,300  acres.  Can  irrigate  300  acres  more.  Irrigated  for 
Dr.  Gonzales'900  acres;  irrigated  for  M.  Williams,  300  acres.  Can  irrigate  from  present  ditch,  Badsasci 
200  acres,  Lanini  200  acres,  Bradbury  300  acres,  Doud  100  acres.  No  charge  this  year.  Next  year 
$1.50  per  acre  for  "thorough  irrigation." 

Doud.  Lot  6  A,  San  Vicente  Rancho.  Three  10-inch  wells,  250,  232,  and  184  feet  deep;  water 
rising  to  within  30  feet  of  surface  of  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  9  feet.  At  first  lowered  it  13 
feet.  Twenty-five  feet  of  gravel.  Pump,  10-inch  Jackson,  throwing  4,000  gallons  per  minute.  Eighty- 
horsepower  engine.  Irrigated  120  acres  6  inches  deep  first  irrigation,  and  4  inches  deep  second  irrigation. 
Cost,  $2  per  acre.  Irrigates  one  hundred  and  twenty  days  of  twelve  hours.  Soil,  adobe. 

McFadden  &  Storm,  on  Vierra  place.     One  hundred  and  ten  acres  beets  from  McFadden  plant. 

Vierra.  Fourteen  acres  alfalfa  and  potatoes  from  McFadden  plant. 

Spreckels  Sugar  Company.  Ranch  No.  1.  From  river  two  18-inch  pumps  on  bridge,  throwing 
10,000  gallons  per  minute  each. 


U.  S    Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100.  Office  of  Expt.  Stations       Irrigation  Invest'gaiions. 


PLATE  XIX. 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Sul.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XX. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    IN    SALINAS    VALLEY. 


203 


Irrigation  hi/  farlori/  irnx/r 


Sprffkrlx  Sugar  Company,  Ranch  No.  1,  umiton  1899-1900. 


Date. 

Acres 
irrigated. 

Depth 
flooded. 

Acre-feet. 

Week  ending- 
September  IB,  1899  .         

55 

Inches. 

September  23  1899 

75 

September  30,  1899  

60 

October  7  1899 

75 

October  H  IX'M 

110 

October  21,  1899 

100 

24 

190 

October  28,  1899  

75 

22 

136  7 

November  4,  1899 

145 

19 

''31  7 

November  11,  1899  

110 

20 

185  1 

November  25,  1899 

30 

25 

62  7 

December  2,  1899  

22 

32 

58  7 

DiTriiibrr  9  1899 

140 

24 

278 

December  16,  1899  

28 

24 

56  3 

December  30  1899 

75 

29 

180  7 

January  (i,  1900  

53 

18 

79  5 

February  3  1900 

42 

20 

68  9 

February  10,  1900  

121 

19 

194 

Total  

1  316 

1  731  3 

Water  supply,  five  4(>-inch  wells,  160  feet  deep;  water  rises  to  within  4  feet  of  surface  of  ground. 
Pumps,  two  12-inch  centrifugal,  throwing  3,500  gallons  per  minute  each.  Both  pumps  lower  water 
level  19  feet.  Forty  feet  of  gravel  to  bottom  of  well. 

Willoughby  tract.     From  Salinas  River. 

Irrigation  on  Willoughby  Tract,  Spreckles  Sugar  Company  Ranch  No.  1,  season  1899-1900. 


Date. 

Acres 
irrigated. 

Depth 
flooded 
to  near- 
est inch. 

|Arrt'-feet. 

Week  ending- 
March  31  1900 

32 

18 

48  5 

April  7,  1900                       .                          

63 

15 

79  4 

April  14  1900 

61 

16 

83  0 

April  21,  1900         .          .            •.  .              

50 

17 

70  5 

April  28   1900 

44 

20 

73  9 

May  5,  1900             .                  

56 

17 

80  6 

Mav  12  1900 

50 

Total                                           

356 

435  9 

M.  Williams.  Lot  7  B,  San  Vicente  Rancho.  Three  10-inch  wells  110  feet  deep.  Water  rises 
to  within  4  feet  of. the  surface  of  the  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  12  feet.  In  gravel  30  feet. 
Pump  8-inch  Krogh,  throwing  1,500  gallons  per  minute.  Lift  of  16  feet  above  pump.  Irrigated  40 
acres  of  alfalfa  12  inches  deep  at  a  cost  of  $3  per  acre.  Can  irrigate  500  acres  from  pump.  Irrigated 
200  acres  from  Gonzales  Water  Company's  DiU-h.  Soil  sandy  loam  and  river  bottom. 

Salinas  Valley  Water  Company.  Arroyo  Seco  Canal  number  1.  Twenty-five  feet  wide,  grade  8 
feet  to  the  mile.  No  irrigation. 

Arroyo  Seco  Canal  number  2.  Top  30  feet,  bottom  20  feet,  depth  5  feet,  grade  5  feet  to  the  mile. 
Irrigated  2,600  acres. 

Salinas  Canal.  Top  40  feet,  bottom  30  feet,  depth  5  feet,  grade  6  inches  to  the  mile.  Irrigated, 
season  of  1900,  2,000  acres. 

San  Lorenzo  Canal.     Top  30  feet,  bottom  20  feet,  depth  5  feet,  grade  about  12  feet  to  the  mile. 


204  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Irrigated,  season  of  1900,  260  acres.  Period  of  irrigation  from  November  to  June.  Charges  $1.50  for 
each  irrigation.  Contract  lien  on  crop  and  money  payable  directly  after  irrigation,  otherwise  interest 
charged.  Twelve  inches  of  water  sufficient.  Alfalfa  4  crops,  2  wettings,  3  tons  to  the  acre. 

Spreckles  Sugar  Company,  Kings  City.  Three  10-inch  wells,  79,  80,  and  81  feet  deep,  and  24  feet 
apart.  Water  rises  to  within  8  feet  of  surface  of  the  ground.  Pumping  lowers  water  level  23  feet.  Pump 
in  pit  8  feet  deep,  and  throws  13,000  gallons  per  hour.  Pump  24  hours  per  day.  Irrigate  4J  acres  per 
day,  using  contour  checks.  Cut  4  crops  of  alfalfa,  2  to  3  tons  per  acre,  and  irrigate  after  every  crop. 
Surface  water  in  adobe  at  21  feet.  Irrigation  wets  down  12  feet.  Can  irrigate  12,270  acres.  Irrigated 
by  Salinas  Valley  Water  Company  from  Salinas  Canal,  20  acres;  from  San  Lorenzo  Canal,  1,200  acres. 

Plant  on  river  at  the  Kings  City  Bridge.  Can  pump  60,000  gallons  per  minute  with  a  48-foot  lift, 
Burn  15  to  18  cords  of  willow  and  cottonwood  per  day,  cost  $1.40  per  cord;  will  cost  $3.50  or  $4  per 
cord.  Irrigate  by  checks  22  inches  high,  50  by  60  feet.  Soil,  sediment,  Can  irrigate  2,000  acres. 
One  irrigation  in  winter  sufficient  for  grain  or  beets. 

CASES  ON  IRRIGATION  AND  WATER  RIGHTS  ARISING  IN  THE  COUNTIES  OF 
MONTEREY,  SAN  BENITO,  AND  SAN  LUIS  OBISPO,  DECIDED  BY  THE  CALI- 
FORNIA SUPREME  COURT. 

As  was  said  before,  there  has  been  little  water-right  litigation  in  the  Salinas 
Valley.  The  cases  decided,  with  the  exception  of  two  already  cited,  involve  no 
general  irrigation  questions.  In  Burrows  v.  Burrows  the  court  held  that  the  failure 
to  post  a  notice  does  not  invalidate  an  appropriation.  In  San  Luis  Water  Company 
v.  Estrada  it  was  held  that  an  appropriate!1  can  change  the  point  of  his  diversion. 
Below  are  given  the  syllabi  of  the  decisions  in  the  irrigation  cases  arising  in  the 
valley. 

ZIMMLER  v.  SAN  LXJIS  WATER  COMPANY. 

(57Cal.,221.) 

Facts. — Plaintiffs  intestate  was  a  riparian  owner  on  San  Luis  Obispo  Creek,  and 
as  such  diverted  part  of  the  water  for  irrigating  his  land.  Defendant  relied  upon  a 
deed  from  plaintiff's  intestate  which  recited  that  whereas  parties  of  second  part  were 
about  to  divert  the  water  of  San  Luis  Obispo  Creek  for  the  purpose  of  supplying 
San  Luis  Obispo  with  water,  therefore  party  of  first  part  granted  "  the  right  to 
convey  water  in  iron  pipes  over  and  across  the  lands  of  the  said  party  of  the  first 
part."  Defendant  claimed  that  this  acted  as  an  estoppel. 

Held. — There  is  no  direct  grant  of  water.  The  plaintiff's  intestate  did  not  admit 
the  right  of  defendant  to  divert  the  water.  Therefore  plaintiff  is  not  estopped  from 
denying  defendant's  right.  If  the  recital  had  been  that  defendant  had  diverted  the 
water,  the  case  would  have  been  different  and  there  might  be  an  estoppel. 

GREEN  v.   CAROTTA. 
(72Cal.,  267.) 

Facts. — Plaintiff  brought  an  action  to  perpetually  enjoin  defendants  from  dis- 
turbing the  flow  of  an  alleged  natural  stream.  Originally  the  water  was  contained 
in  a  lagoon  on  defendants'  land.  More  than  ten  years  before  suit  a  former  owner 
of  both  parcels  cut  a  ditch  for  the  purpose  of  drainage  and  irrigation.  Defendants 
used  all  of  such  water  adversely  to  the  whole  world,  except  some  which  they  allowed 
to  go  to  waste.  No  adverse  claim  was  set  up  against  them  for  more  than  ten  years 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    IN    SALINAS    VALLEY.  205 

prior  to  the  action.     The  ditch  ran  to  the  border  of  plaintiff's  land,  and  plaintiff  had 
used  the  waste  water  by  leave  of  defendants,  not  in  writing. 

Held. — Defendants  owned  the  water  absolutely.  Therefore  plaintiff  never 
acquired  any  riparian  right.  His  license  was  revocable  at  any  time. 

BURROWS  v.   BURROWS. 

(82Cal.,  564.) 

Facts. — In  1877  defendant  dug  a  ditch  and  appropriated  the  waters  of  Muddy 
Creek,  which  was  then  on  the  public  domain,  and  used  them  for  domestic  and  irri- 
gating purposes.  He  failed,  however,  to  post  the  notice  required  by  section  1415  of 
the  Civil  Code.  In  1883  plaintiff  gained  title  to  land  on  the  creek  from  the  United 
States.  At  most  seasons  there  was  enough  water  for  all  parties,  but  for  a  portion 
of  the  year  there  was  not.  The  lower  court  held  that  the  water  should  be  divided 
during  the  dry  season.  Plaintiff  disputed  the  validity  of  defendant's  appropriation. 

Ili-ld. — Defendant's  appropriation  was  valid.  The  failure  to  post  the  notice  did 
not  make  it  invalid.  The  object  of  the  notice  is  to  allow  the  appropriates  to  take 
advantage  of  the  doctrine  of  relation.  The  court  intimated  that  the  lower  court  went 
too  far  in  dividing  the  water,  but  as  defendant  did  not  complain  the  judgment  was 

affirmed. 

SMITH  v.  CORBIT. 

(116  Cal.,  587.)' 

Facts. — Mrs.  M.  had  a  parcel  of  land  on  which  a  stream  had  its  source  and  flowed 
for  some  distance.  She  used  the  water  for  domestic  and  irrigating  purposes.  She 
conveyed  one  parcel  to  D,  who  from  the  time  of  his  purchase  used  one-half  of  the 
water  for  the  above  purposes.  Later  he  sold  to  plaintiffs  who  continued  the  use. 
Mrs.  M.  sold  another  parcel  above  plaintiff's  to  defendant.  He  used  part  of  the  water 
for  the  same  purposes.  There  was  a  dam  on  his  land  which  had  been  put  there  by 
Mrs.  M.  He  moved  the  point  of  diversion  higher  up  the  stream.  In  1894  the  stream 
was  not  full  enough  to  supply  defendant's  diversion,  and  consequently  he  took  nearly 
all  of  the  water,  but  did  not  waste  any. 

Held. — Plaintiff  is  entitle^  to  recover.  By  her  grant  Mrs.  M.  gave  him  an  ease- 
ment. "  The  general  rule  of  law  is  that  when  a  party  grants  a  thing  he,  by  implication, 
grants  whatever  is  incident  to  it  and  necessary  to  its  beneficial  enjoyment."  Mrs.  M. 
had  used  the  water  for  the  purposes  for  which  plaintiff  used  it  and  must  be  presumed 
to  have  granted  a  right  to  the  water  which  was  reasonably  necessary.  That  this  was 
the  intention  was  shown  by  her  acquiesence  in  plaintiff's  user. 

Defendant  had  a  right  to  change  the  place  of  diversion,  provided  he  did  not 
injuriously  affect  the  rights  of  others.  It  did  not  entitle  him  to  more  than  one-half 
the  water  of  the  stream,  however. 

Aside  from  plaintiff's  easement,  both  parties  were  entitled  to  have  their  natural 
wants  supplied  before  any  water  could  be  used  for  irrigation.  After  that  each  would 
be  entitled  to  a  reasonable  use  for  irrigation.  The  court  might  therefore  apportion 
the  flow  by  periods  of  time. 


206  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

SAN  LUIS  WATER  COMPANY  v.  ESTRADA. 

(117  Cal.,  168.) 

Fact*. — Plaintiff  was  a  corporation  formed  to  furnish  water  to  San  Luis  Obispo. 
In  1870  defendant  Estrada,  a  riparian  owner  on  San  Luis  Obispo  Creek  above  the 
point  of  plaintiff's  diversion,  used  the  water  for  domestic  purposes.  The  grantors  of 
other  defendants  about  the  same  time  used  the  water  for  domestic  purposes  and  for 
the  purpose  of  running  a  mill.  In  1872  plaintiff's  grantor  was  given  a  franchise  to 
supply  water,  and  in  1875  it  was  transferred  to  plaintiffs.  Plaintiffs  diverted  about 
500,000  gallons  per  day.  Later  the  defendant  Estrada  used  the  water  for  irrigating 
35  acres  adversely  to  everybody,  except  two  of  the  other  defendants  who  owned 
farther  up  the  stream.  The  other  defendants  also  used  the  water  for  irrigation.  The 
lower  court  held  that  plaintiff  was  entitiled  to  500,000  gallons  daily.  Estrada  was 
entitled,  except  as  against  other  defendants,  to  divert  at  a  certain  place  as  much  as 
he  had  been  taking.  Jones  and  Moreland  were  entitled  to  use  the  water  for  domestic 
purposes,  and  after  plaintiff  had  taken  500,000  gallons  to  use  it  for  irrigation.  An 
injunction  was  granted. 

Held.  —The  decision  of  the  lower  court  was  correct,  except  as  to  the  point  at 
which  Estrada  could  divert.  He  was  entitled  to  change  the  point  of  diversion,  if  by 
so  doing  he  would  not  injure  the  rights  of  others. 

The  transfer  of  the  franchise  to  the  corporation  was  not  unconstitutional. 

Evidence  as  to  the  capacity  of  the  flume  and  the  amount  of  water  used  is  evidence 
of  appropriation. 

The  necessities  of  the  town  can  not  increase  plaintiff's  right. 

Plaintiff  had  a  right  to  appropriate  what  was  left  after  the  use  by  the  riparian 
owners  in  1875. 

Plaintiff  relies  upon  appropriation  and  therefore  arguments  against  title  by 
adverse  use  do  not  apply. 

Where  plaintiff  accepted  an  assignment  of  a  lease  of  the  lands  upon  which  a 
defendant  was  using  a  water  right,  such  lease  is  admissible  in  evidence  as  tending  to 
show  that  plaintiff  did  not  own  such  water  right,  and  as  tending  to  admit  defendant's 
right  thereto. 

SUMMARY. 

• 

As  a  result  of  the  preceding  study  of  irrigation  conditions  in  the  Salinas  Valley, 
it  is  now  possible  to  answer  the  questions  laid  before  the  advisory  board  of  engineers, 
and  I  think  the  conclusions  reached  will  recommend  themselves  to  the  people  of 
California.  The  questions  were — 

1.  Is  the  present  method  of  tiling  and  recording  claims  to  water  satisfactory?  If 
not,  what  should  take  its  place  ? 

Anmcer. — The  present  method  is  not  satisfactory.  Any  system  which  it  may 
seem  desirable  to  recommend  to  take  the  place  of  the  present  lack  of  system  must 
necessarily  be  based  on  our  knowledge  of  certain  physical  facts.  If  these  facts  have 
not  been  obtained  as  yet,  are  not  of  record,  or  defective  when  of  record,  then  it  seems 
that  the  first  attention  should  be  turned  to  the  collecting  and  digesting  of  this  necessary 
material.  As  even  such  data  as  are  to  be  had  are  widely  scattered  in  different  localities, 
it  follows  that  there  must  be  some  central  authority  to  which  all  this  material  must  go. 


IRRIGATION    PROBLEMS    IN    SALINAS    VALLEY.  207 

2.  Is  the  present  method  of  adjudicating  rights  satisfactory?     If  not,  what  should 
replace  it? 

Anxwvr. — It  is  not.  It  can  not  be  until  the  necessary  data  on  which  to  base  an 
equable  decision  arc  available.  If  a  board  be  established  to  take  charge  of  those  data, 
it  would  be  naturally  best  qualified  to  render  an  equable  decision,  and  should  be  made 
up  with  this  end  in  view. 

3.  Is  there  any  method  by  which  the  owner  of  a  tract  of  land  can  acquire  directly 
from  the  public  a  right  to  the  water  which  reclaims  that  land,  as  he  can  now  obtain 
title  to  the  public  land  itself  by  means  of  the  desert  or  homestead  law?     If  not,  should 
there  be  legislation  to  provide  for  this? 

Answer. — There  should  be  legislation  to  provide  for  this  and  use  of  the  water 
should  attach  to  the  land. 

•i.  What  has  been  the  influence  of  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  on  the  success 
of  irrigation,  and  what  modifications  of  this  doctrine  are  suggested? 

Answer. — The  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  has  been  harmful  to  irrigation  develop- 
ment, and  the  California  riparian  law  should  be  repealed. 

5.  Is  the  present  system  of  stream  control  and  of  division  of  water  satisfactory? 
Answer. — It  is  not.     The  same  central  board,  to  the  creation  of  which  reference 

has  been  made,  could  put  this  matter  in  charge  of  an  executive  officer. 

6.  Should  there  be  a  State  engineer,  and  what  should  be  his  duties? 

Answer. — There  need  be  no  State  engineer  for  this  particular  purpose  if  the 
board  of  control  appoints  as  its  executive  officer  a  man  of  wide  experience  in  the  con- 
struction and  management  of  irrigation  works.  Physical  data  are  now  being  collected 
in  a  satisfactory  manner  by  the  National  Government,  and  by  suitable  cooperation  on 
the  part  of  the  State  of  California  the  national  work  can  be  sufficiently  enlarged 
in  scope  to  gather  the  necessary  physical  data.  The  duties  of  the  executive  officer 
would  therefore  be  largely  supervisory  and  advisory.  All  plans  for  new  irrigation 
works  should  be  submitted  to  the  board  of  control,  and  after  approval  the  execu- 
tive officer  of  the  board  should  see  that  they  are  carried  out  as  approved.  The 
executive  officer  of  the  board  of  control  should  also  present  to  the  latter  the  facts  on 
which  to  base  its  decisions  in  cases  of  dispute,  and  should  see  that  the  decisions  of 
the  board  are  carried  out. 

7.  Should  there  be  a  central  office  of  record  of  claims  or  titles  to  water  in  place 
of  the  present  separate  county  records,  and  what  supervision  or  control  should  be 
exercised  over  rights  to  be  acquired  hereafter? 

Answer. — There  should  be  a  central  office,  and  the  board  of  control  already 
referred  to  should  have  the  determination  of  existing  rights  and  the  control  of  the 
establishment  of  rights  hereafter. 

8.  What  steps  should  be  taken  to  secure  the  fullest  conservation  and  use  of  water 
which  now  runs  to  waste  ?    The  discussion  of  this  question  to  include  State  or  National 
control  and  aid,  the  legislation  needed  to  define  rights  to  stored  water,  and  to  deter- 
mine who  is  entitled  to  the  waters  thus  stored. 

Answer. — There  should  be  cooperation  and  consultation  between  the  State  and 
National  governments  looking  to  the  fullest  possible  use  of  the  waters  of  the  State 
for  irrigation,  with  especial  reference  to  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  rivers.  The 
work  of  the  National  Government  should  include:  («)  Improvement  of  the  rivers; 


208 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


(7>)  protection  of  the  fore.sts;  (<•)  aid  in  the  adoption  of  better  methods  of  irrigation, 
as  the  work  now  being  done  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture;  ((7)  collection  of 
accurate  stream-flow  and  run-off  data;  and  (e)  storage  of  waters  for  the  public  lands. 
It  has  already  been  stated  that  special  legislation  is  needed  to  detine  rights  to 
stored  waters,  as  at  present  these  rights  are  vested  in  the  riparian  owners. 


APPENDIX. 

WATER-BEARING    GRAVELS  AND    FORMATIONS    TRIBUTARY  TO  THE  UNDER- 
GROUND   WATER     SUPPLY    OF     THE    SALINAS    VALLEY    IN    MONTEREY 

COUNTY. 

By  EDWAKD  II.  XUTTER. 

In  June  and  July,  1900,  under  the  direction  of  Dr.  J.  C.  Brainier,  Mr.  L.  D. 
Mills  and  I  undertook  to  trace  out  and  map  the  formations  in  Monterey  County 
which  appear  to  bear  directly  on  the  underground  water  supply  of  the  Salinas  Valley. 
The  work  was  done  by  Mr.  Mills  and  myself,  working  together  from  June  -t  to  June 
28,  at  which  date  Mr.  Mills  left,  and  the  remainder  of  the  work  was  done  by  me 
without  assistance. 

A  general  outline  of  the  geological  structure  and  history  will  perhaps  serve  to 
make  clearer  the  bearing  of  any  details  which  may  be  given  below. 

From  Doud  northwest  the  Salinas  Valley  is  carved  in  granite  and  other  crystalline 
rocks,  while  the  southern  portion  is  cut  in  gently  sloping  beds  of  marine  Pliocene 


CONVENTIONAL     SIGNS       USED 


Conglomerate 


Sandstone 


Fossiliferous  Sandstone 


Gravel 


Lignite 


Sandy  Soil 


FIG.  5. — Conventional  signs  used  in  illustrating  report  on  Salinas  River. 

sediments.  These  beds,  if  they  extend  into  the  northern  end  of  the  valley,  have  been 
completely  buried  by  material  which  has  been  washed  in  from  the  hills  and  moun- 
tains on  both  sides  of  the  valley,  and  which  has  been  spread  out  in  the  form  of  very 
large  alluvial  cones  or  fans.  Going  southward  from  the  district  characterized  by 
these  fans,  the  Pliocene  gravels  begin  to  crop  out  from  beneath  the  talus  at  River- 
bank  and  at  a  point  about  one  mile  south  of  the  Salvation  Army  Colony,  and  grad- 
ually rise  until  at  Kings  City  they  form  a  series  of  beds  that  extend  eastward  about 
eighteen  miles  from  the  Salinas  River.  From  Kings  City  to  the  San  Luis  Obispo 
County  line  these  same  beds  form  the  southeastern  escarpment  of  the  immediate 
valley,  with  an  average  height  of  about  100  feet  above  the  river.  For  the  most  part 
these  Pliocene  beds  overlie  Miocene  sediment,  but  in  some  places  they  are  on  the 


WATER-BEARING    FORMATIONS    OF    SALINAS    VALLEY. 


209 


older  rock.  The  ages  of  these  Pliocene  and  Miocene  beds  were  fixed  from  fossils 
found  in  them,  which  were  identified  by  Mr.  Ralph  Arnold,  of  Stanford  University. 
The  Pliocene  fossils  were  found  in  sandstone  about  20  miles  southeast  of  Monterey 
City,  in  sec,  20,  T.  6  S.,  R.  3  E.,  M.  D.  M.  The  beds  in  which  they  occur  are  appar- 
ently the  same  as  those  east  of  Kings  City.  The  Miocene  fossils  were  from  shale 
beds  outcropping  on  the  west  side  of  the  Salinas  River  at  W  impost. 

In  the  southern  part  of  the  county  there  have  been  at  least  two  general  elevations 
of  the  land  surface,  for  the  Pliocene  gravels  forming  the  large  terrace  are  to  a  great 
extent  composed  of  shale  pebbles,  and  these  same  beds  have  been  tilted  and  are  con- 
formable with  beds  of  shale. 

The  partings  between  the  rock  in  place  and  the  gravels  and  other  alluvial  material 
were  traced  from  a  point  about  2£  miles  east  of  St.  Joseph's  Colony,  in  sec.  18, 
T.  15  S.,  R.  5  E.,  in  a  general  southeasterly  direction,  to  the  southwest  corner  of 
T.  18  S.,  R.  8  E.,  and  from  Lonoak  on  the  San  Lorenzo  River  in  a  general  south- 
easterly direction  through  the  Peach  Tree,  Slacks  Canyon,  and  Cholame  Valley 
country  to  Parkfield.  They  were  also 
traced  from  Pleyto,  in  T.  24  S. ,  R.  9  E. ,  N' w- 
around  the  San  Antonio  Valley,  and  to 
some  extent  in  the  Nacimiento  River 
country.  Also  from  the  San  Luis 
Obispo  County  line  the  partings  were 
traced  around  Hames  Valley  to  Wun- 
post  Station,  thence  in  a  general  north- 
westerly direction  to  a  point  about  2 
miles  south  of  Sprockets'  beet-sugar 
factory,  thence  southward  to  sec.  21, 
T.  16  S.,  R.  3  E. 

Beginning   at   about  the  Southwest    FIG.  6.— Outcrop  of  beds  in  terrace  immediately  south  of  head 
£  T>    1  i  (J      t>    o  T?      •    iU  of  Salinas  Valley  Water  Company's  irrigating  ditch  on  tlie 

rner  of  1 .  Ih  S. ,  R.  8  L. ,  is  the  terrace        San  Lorenzo  River. 
or  upland,  formed  of  the  marine  Plio- 
cene beds  already  mentioned.     At  the  head  of  the  Salinas  Valley  Water  Company's 
irrigating  ditch  on  the  San  Lorenzo  River  the  terrace  is  formed  of  beds  of  coarse 
and  tine  sandstone  and  flinty  conglomerate.     (Fig.  6.) 

The  fact  that  these  beds  are  hardened  into  sandstones  and  conglomerate  at  this 
and  some  other  points  led  to  the  supposition  that  the  line  between  the  terrace  and 
the  valley  lowland  marked  the  easternmost  limit  of  the  water-bearing  gravels,  and 
consequently  this  line  was  traced.  Data  subsequently  collected  seemed  to  show,  how- 
ever, that  the  lowest  beds  of  this  terrace,  which  are  for  the  most  part  porous  sands 
and  gravels,  extend  under  the  Salinas  Valley.  It  therefore  seems  certain  that  the 
terrace  area  is  largely  tributary  to  the  underground  water  supply,  and  the  eastern 
limit  of  this  area  was  consequently  traced  out. 

From  the  contact  east  of  St.  Josephs  Colony  to  about  River  bank  the  rock  in 
place  is  granite,  mica  schist,  and  gneiss,  and  the  alluvial  material  which  laps  upon 
these  rocks  is  a  granite  soil  containing  angular  fragments  of  granite  and  schist. 
Occasionally,  slightly  rounded  fragments,  looking  as  though  they  had  been  water- 

23856— No.  100—01 1-i 


cor 


210 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


<r 

o 


worn,  were  found,  but  these  were  unusual.  The  feature  of  the  topography  between 
these  points  on  both  sides  of  the  valley  is  the  number  of  alluvial  cones  or  fans,  already 
mentioned,  which  spread  out  from  the  mouths  of  the  canyons,  which  cones  are  them- 
selves cut  by  smaller  gulches.  A  rudely  stratified  earthy  conglomerate,  the  pebbles 
of  which  are  angular  fragments  of  granite,  schist,  and  gneiss,  varying  in  size  from 
sand  grains  to  fragments  the  size  of  one's  head,  is  usually  found  capping  these  fans. 
In  this  section  of  the  valley  also  the  smaller  stream  beds,  as  they  approach  the  river, 
show  few  signs  of  recent  erosion,  where  observed,  as  though  the  water  had  sunk 
away  into  the  ground. 

Beginning  at  Riverbank,  on  the  northeastern  side,  and  at  a  point  about  1  mile 
south  of  the  Salvation  Army  Colony,  on  the  southwestern  side  of  the  valley,  are  to  be 
found  the  first  true  gravels,  the  Pliocene  beds  already  mentioned,  consisting  of  well- 
rounded  pebbles.  At  Riverbank  they  occur  in  stratified  beds  in  railroad  cuts,  and  at 
both  places  they  underlie  the  granite  soil  above  mentioned.  Presumably  these 
gravels  extend  under  the  valley  from  Soledad  to  Salinas  at  least,  for  apparently  the 

same  beds  are  exposed  in  a  cut  on 

s.w.  N.E.    the  southwest  side  of  the  Salinas 

River  opposite  the  sugar  factory.. 
From  Riverbank  to  Metz  the  rocks 
in  place  are  granite  and  other  ig- 
neous rocks,  shale,  and  crystalline 
limestone. 

Beginning  at  the  southwest  cor- 
ner of  township  18  S.,  R.  8  E., 
and  extending  over  the  greater 
part  of  Topo  Rancho  and  the  Bit- 
tcrwater  country  and  southeast 
into  San  Luis  Obispo  County,  is 
the  Pliocene  terrace.  The  north- 
eastern edge  of  this  terrace  fol- 
lows, for  the  most  part,  a  series  of 

anticlinal  valleys  extending  in  a  northwest-southeast  direction  through  the  Peach 
Tree,  Slacks  Canyon,  and  Cholame  country. 

At  Barretts  Oil  Well,  in  the  southwest  quarter  of  sec.  31,  T.  22  S.,  R.  1-t  E.,  a 
large  quantity  of  water  was  encountered  in  a  bed  of  granitic  sand  at  a  depth  of  about 
300  feet  below  the  surface.  (Fig.  7.) 

In  the  bed  of  angular  granitic  sand  more  water  flowed  into  the  well  than  could 
be  pumped  out.  Elevation  at  top  of  well  is  1,870  feet  above  Kings  City.  Dip  of 
shale  is  54  degrees  southwest.  This  suggests  the  possibility  of  artesian  water  being 
found  in  the  Salinas  Valley  if  wells  were  sunk  to  a  sufficient  depth.  There  are  several 
folds  between  this  well  and  the  valley,  however. 

The  beds  forming  the  terrace  are  folded  on  each  side  of  the  Cholame  Valley 
about  Imusdale,  but  from  about  sec.  27,  T.  23  S.,  R.  13  E.,  they  dip  at  an  angle 
of  about  3  degrees  toward  the  Salinas  River.  The  distinguishing  features  of  this 
terrace  formation  are  the  rather  flat-topped  hills,  nearly  all  of  which  are  in  the  same 
general  plane,  the  large  quantity  of  shale  pebbles  in  the  gravel  beds,  and  the 
capping  of  rather  loose  sandstone  containing  enough  lime  to  whiten  it.  These  over- 


§ 


FIG.  7. — Sand  and  shale  beds  passed  through  |jy  Barrett's  oil  well 
in  southwest  quarter  section  31,  T.  22  S.,  R.  14  E. 


WATER-BEARING    FORMATION'S    OF    SALINAS    VALLEY. 


211 


lying  limy  sand  beds  occur  ;it  nearly  all  the  places  where  the  terrace  formation  was 
observed. 

On  the  western  side  of  the  Salinas  Valley,  from  the  south  boundary  of  Monterey 
County  to  near  Paraiso  Springs,  the  rock  in  place  is  shale.  It  is  the  same  in  the  San 
Antonio  and  Nacimiento  River  valleys  where,  traced. 

In  a  cut  on  the  Southern  Pacific  Railroad  about  2  miles  northwest  of  Bradley 
there  is  a  good  exposure  of  some  of  the  beds  of  the  terrace  in  an  anticline.  (Fig.  8.) 

But  few  satisfactory  well  records  wore  obtained.  The  first  six  of  the  following 
were  furnished  to  Professor  Marx  by  D'Arcy  Porter,  of  Salinas  City. 

A  7-inch  well  in  the  river  bottom  near  the  factory  of  the  Spreckels  Sugar  Com- 
pany. 4  miles  south  of  Salinas  City: 

From  1  foot  to  11  feet,  sediment,  water;  from  1 1  to  37  feet,  blue  sand;  from  37  to  55  feet,  blue  sandy 
clay;  from  55  to  80  feet,  blue  clay;  from  80  to  92  feet,  blue  sandy  clay;  from  92  to  96  feet,  blue  sand; 
from  96  to  97  feet,  small  rocks;  from  97  to  117  feet,  blue  fine  gravel;  from  117  to  134  feet,  brown  fine 
gravel;  from  134  to  149  feet,  coarse  gravel;  from  149  to  159  feet,  coarse  gravel  and  rocks,  water;  from 
159  to  162  feet,  yellow  clay. 


^ About  'A.  mile        .__.  .-»' 

FIG.  8. — Northern  slope  of  anticline  cut  by  railroad  '2  miles  northwest  of  Bradley.    The  thin  seam  of  lignite  has  gypsum 
mixed  with  it,    The  fossils  are  limpets,  turritellas,  and  various  clam  and  oyster  shells. 

A  10-inch  well  one-half  mile  from  the  ocean: 

From  1  foot  to  2  feet,  adobe  sediment,  water  at  4  feet;  from  2  to  10  feet,  blue  sand;  from  10  to  22 
feet,  blue  clay;  from  22  to  48  feet,  fine  gravel;  from  48  to  63  feet,  blacjt  hard  clay;  from  63  to  127  feet, 
fine  gravel;  from  127  to  131  feet,  coarse  gravel  and  rocks;  from  131  to  135  feet,  red,  hard  dry  sand. 

A  well  7  inches  in  diameter,  9  miles  east  of  Salinas  and  1  mile  southwest  from 
the  Gabilan  Peak: 

From  1  foot  to  20  feet,  red  dirt  and  fine  gravel;  from  20  to  62  feet,  red  dirt  and  coarse  gravel; 
from  62  to  95  feet,  red  clay  and  gravel;  from  95  to  99  feet,  coarse  gravel;  from  99  to  114  feet,  yellow 
xjlay,  water;  from  114  to  135  feet,  coarse  gravel;  from  135  to  137  feet,  yellow  clay. 

A  well  in  the  city  of  Salinas: 

From  1  foot  to  6  feet,  black  loam  sediment,  water  at  14  feet;  from  6  to  22  feet,  sediment;  from  22 
to  46  feet,  yellow  clay;  from  46  to  43  feet,  clay  and  gravel;  from  4S  to  65  feet,  blue  clay;  from  65  to 
77  feet,  yellow  clay  and  gravel;  from  77  to  84  feet,  coarse  gravel,  water;  from  84  to  94  feet,  fine  gravel; 
from  94  to  147  feet,  yellow  clay;  from  147  to  154  feet,  fine  gravel;  from  154  to  229  feet,  coarse  gravel 
with  rocks,  water. 

A  well  halfway  between  Salinas  and  Santa  Rita: 

From  1  foot  to  84  feet,  red  dirt  with  a  little  gravel;  from  84  to  90  feet,  gravel,  water;  from  90  to 
115  feet,  yellow  clay;  from  115  to  216  feet,  blue  clay  with  clam  shells  and  pieces  of  redwood. 

A  well  2  miles  northeast  of  Santa  Rita:  • 

From  1  foot  to  140  feet,  red  dirt  and  yellow  clay;  then  went  into  a  brown  porous  rock  full  of 
water,  but  did  not  go  through  it. 


212 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


The  following  records  are  from  data  furnished  by  the  owners  of  the  wells,  and 
were  verified  as  much  as  possible  by  direct  observation: 

A  well  one-fourth  mile  southwest  of  Kings  City  was  dug  in  yellow  sand,  and  has 
water  standing  at  about  40  feet  from  surface. 

A  well  west  of  Kings  City  in  NE.  i  sec,  13,  T.  20  S. ,  R.  7  E. ,  dug  in  shale,  Water 
stands  at  127  feet  from  surface,  and  is  unfit  for  household  use. 

A  well  on  Burchards  Ranch,  4  miles  east  of  Kings  City: 

From  1  foot  to  20  feet,  gravel,  some  water;  from  20  to  86  feet,  gravel  and  shale;  from  86  to  141 
feet,  shale,  sand,  and  gravel  (fossiliferous);  from  141  to  165  feet,  clean  yellow  sand,  water. 

The  elevation  of  this  well  is  about  60  feet  above  Kings  City. 

A  well  in  Hames  Valley,  near  southeast  corner  of  sec.  9,  T.  24  S. ,  R.  10  E.,  has 
water  standing  at  about  130  feet  from  surface.  Well  is  sunk  in  gravel.  Water  is 
unfit  for  household  purposes. 

No  accurate  observations  of  water  levels  in  other  wells  were  made,  but  in  the 
wells  of  the  Salinas  Valley  and  of  that  portion  of  the  above-mentioned  terrace  which 
lies  nearest  the  valley  the  levels  appear  to  correspond  with  the  water  level  of  the 
Salinas  River. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

(1)  For  the  most  part  the  Salinas  Valley  in  Monterey  County  is  a  trough  that 
probably  holds  a  great  deal  of  water. 

(2)  The  valley  in  its  northern  part,  from  near  Doud  to  some  point  between  Chu- 
alar  and  Salinas,  is  covered  with  talus  washed  in  from  existing  mountains. 

(3)  Pliocene  gravels  and  sands  underlie  this  talus,  though  to  what  extent  is 
uncertain.     (Fig.  9.) 


N.E. 


« - About9  Miles  -J 

FIG.  9. — Probable  structure  of  Salinas  Valley  on  a  northeast  and  southwest  line  through  Chualar. 

structure. 


A,  B,  observed 


(4)  Going  southward  from  Soledad,  these  Pliocene  beds  begin  to  rise  from 
beneath  the  talus  at  about  Riverbank,  and  a  northeast-southwest  section  through 
Metz  would  be  about  as  in  fig.  10. 

(5)  From  east  of  Kings  City  these  beds  form  to  the  southward  an  extensive  ter- 
race, which  continues  into  San  Luis  Obispo  County,  and  which  is  probably  tributary 
to  the  underground  water  supply  of  the  Salinas  Valley.     (Fig.  11.) 

A  cross  section  through  the  terrace  and  Salinas  Valley  along  any  other  line  of 
the  same  general  trend  between  this  section  and  the  county  line  would  show  substan- 
tially the  same  structure. 


WATER-BEARING    FORMATIONS    OF    SALINAS    VALLEY. 


213 


((>)  Iii  the  drainage  area  of  the  San  Antonio  and  Nacimicnto  rivers  there  are 
also  Pliocene  gravels  which  are  indirectly  tributary  to  the  underground  water  supply 
of  the  Salinas  Valley. 


S.W. 


f 


N.E. 


10  miles 

Fio.  10.— Probable  structure  of  Salinas  Valley  on  a  line  running  through  Metz  and  Venezuela.    A,  B,  observed  structure. 
Altitude  of  C=l,400  feet  above  Kings  City.    Dip  of  gravel  bed  at  outcrop  is  14°  N.  20°  E. 

(7)  It  seems  probable  that  deep  wells  put  down  near  the  margin  of  the  Pliocene 
terrace,  between  Kings  City  and  the  San  Luis  Obispo  County  line,  may  yield  consid- 
erable water,  perhaps  artesian. 


N.E. 


Lewis  Creek 


S.W. 


8  miles 


FIG.  11.— Probable  structure  of  Salinas  Valley  and  terrace  containing  marine  fossils  on  a  line  running  northeast-southwest 

through  San  Lucas.    A,  B,  0,  observed  structure. 

(8)  It  is  possible  that  artesian  water  may  be  found  in  the  region  of  the  San  Anto- 
nio and  Nacimiento  rivers,  but  not  enough  detailed  work  has  been  done  there  to 
warrant  any  definite  conclusions  upon  the  subject  at  present. 


IRRIGATION  FROM  TH1-  SAX  JOAQUIN  RIVER. 

By  FRANK  Sori.E, 
Professor  of  Civil  Engineering  in  the  Uni  remit  y  of  California. 

INTRODUCTION. 

It  is  now  admitted  by  practically  all  intelligent  citizens  of  California  who  have 
considered  the  matter  that  the  subject  of  irrigation  is  the  most  important  one  ever 
brought  forward  for  the  consideration  of  all  our  people.  They  acknowledge,  as  a 
vital  fact,  that  upon  the  complete  development  of  her  agricultural  and  horticultural 
capabilities  must  be  founded  her  greatest  and  most  enduring  prosperity.  The 
discover}*  of  gold  or  petroleum  may  give  to  a  State' a  feverish  or  fitful  impetus;  but 
her  permanent  position  must  ever  be  dependent  upon  the  character  and  quantity  of 
the  products  of  her  soil  and  her  facilities  for  obtaining  for  them  a  good  market. 
And  when,  as  in  every  arid  or  semiarid  region,  the  character  and  quantity  of  the  soil 
products  ure  directly  dependent  upon  the  application  of  water  by  irrigation,  the 
development  and  conservation  of  the  supply  of  this  water  is.  a  vital  consideration. 
As  the  water  supply  is  found  in  the  streams,  they  must  be  skillfully  husbanded,  and 
the  forests,  their  birthplace,  carefully  preserved,  if  the  lands  cultivated  are  to  attain 
their  possible  fertility  and  productiveness. 

The  forests  and  waters  once  conserved,  both  should  be  administered  in  the 
manner  contributing  in  the  greatest  degree  to  the  benefit  of  all;  which  is  simply 
saying  in  the  wisest  and  most  economical  manner.  In  California,  as  elsewhere,  the 
projector  of  an  irrigation  enterprise  should  be  made  to  feel  secure  in  the  possession 
of  his  water  rights  previous  to  expending  his  energies  and  fortune  in  such  system. 
He  should  be  able  to  hold  as  certain  title  to  the  use  of  the  water  for  a  beneficial 
purpose  as  is  held  to  the  land  or  property  on  which  the  water  is  used.  Any  doubt 
or  uncertainty  on  this  point  affecting  either  jeopardizes  both,  for  in  many  cases 
without  water  the  land  is  worthless.  If  a  capitalist  believes  that  in  embarking  upon 
an  irrigation  venture  he  is  buying  a  tedious  and  expensive  lawsuit  he  is  likely  to  seek 
other  investment  for  his  capital;  and  if  a  farmer  be  sure  that  every  attempt  to  bring 
water  upon  his  land  will  be  met  by  some  obscure  claim  of  previous  appropriation  or 
ownership  he  will  probably  purchase  a  farm  in  some  other  locality. 

In  California,  unfortunately,  by  a  legal  "tide-rip"  between  the  riparian 
principle,  brought  over  with  the  common  law  of  England,  and  the  right  of 
appropriation  of  water  established  by  our  gold  seekers  and  afterwards  embodied  in 
the  civil  code  of  our  State,  a  stream  of  litigation,  tempestuous  and  baffling  to 
enterprise,  was  injected  into  our  irrigation  sea,  bringing  to  the  surface  a  great 

mass  of  very  unpleasant  matter. 

215 


216  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

That  this  condition  of  irrigation  affairs  should  be  reformed  is  the  sincere  wish 
of  every  thinking  citizen  of  our  State.  With  a  code  of  water  laws  based  upon 
fairness  and  justice  to  all,  and  an  administration  of  them  seeking  the  greatest  good 
to  the  greatest  number,  not  only  would  the  irrigated  districts  but  the  whole  State 
bound  forward  in  a  career  of  prosperity. 

A  BRIEF    HISTORY  OF    THE    DEVELOPMENT  OF    IRRIGATION  IN  CALIFORNIA 
AND  IN  THE  SAN  JOAftUIN  VALLEY. 

The  problems  to  be  discussed  in  this  paper  are  those  relating  to  irrigation  from 
San  Joaquin  River  and  its  tributaries.  It  seems  best,  before  turning  directly  to 
them,  to  give  a  brief  history  of  the  development  of  irrigation  in  California  and 
more  particularly,  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valle}'. 

California,  at  first  possessed  by  Spain  and  afterwards  by  Mexico,  derived  its 
earliest  ideas  and  methods  of  irrigation  from  those  countries.  The  first  irrigation  in 
the  State  was  practiced  by  the  Spanish  mission  fathers,  who,  while  converting  to 
Christianity  and  civilizing  the  Indians,  planted  and  cultivated  vineyards,  orchards, 
and  farms  surrounding  the  missions.  The  methods  of  irrigation  in  Spain  were 
peculiarly  applicable  to  the  coast  region  and  interior  valleys  of  California  because  of 
the  similarity  of  natural  conditions  in  the  two  countries. 

Until  the  coming  of  the  Americans  the  water  laws  of  California  were  those  of 
Mexico  and  Spain.  Under  them  the  waters  of  the  stream  were  held  to  be  a  public 
trust,  title  to  which  could  not  be  granted  to  any  private  person  or  corporation. 
Permission  for  use  only  could  be  given,  and  then  to  the  actual  user  and  to  the  amount 
used.  Upon  the  discovery  of  gold  in  California  in  1848  the  miners  took  water  from 
the  streams  to  wash  the  golden  sands,  and  established  local  laws  dictated  by  common 
sense  and  the  interests  of  their  industry.  As  indicating  their  righteousness,  it  may 
be  said  that  they  were  practically  the  same  in  all  mining  districts,  however  widely 
separated. 

As  time  went  on  California,  which  had  been  at  first  almost  exclusively  a  mining 
State,  became  a  great  agricultural  one.  Its  valleys  and  hill  slopes  produced  immense 
quantities  of  wheat  and  other  cereals,  and  spots  favored  by  nature  were  converted 
into  wonderfully  productive  orchards  and  vineyards.  Wherever  within  her  bound- 
aries the  rainfall  was  ample  and  reliable  crops  were  good,  both  in  quality  and 
quantity;  but  in  many  localities  where  the  soil  and  sun  were  friendly  the  rainfall 
was  uncertain  and  often  deficient.  Settlers  in  many  cases  realized  the  importance, 
and  often  the  absolute  necessity,  of  the  artificial  use  of  water  upon  their  farms  in 
order  to  secure  crops  and  a  livelihood. 

The  first  attempts  of  the  American  fanner  at  irrigation  resulted  in  works  of  the 
most  primitive  character.  Often  individual  effort  led  to  the  introduction  upon  the 
land,  through  a  plow  furrow,  of  a  small  quantity  of  water  from  a  neighboring 
stream.  Later,  communities  of  farmers  cooperated  and  constructed  irrigation  canals, 
to  be  utilized  in  common.  At  first,  of  course,  the  water  most  readily  obtained 
was  made  use  of,  and  for  a  time  only  small,  cheap  systems  were  constructed,  and 
elementary  irrigation  practiced. 

As  districts  became  more  populous  and  the  necessity  for  water  greater,  individ- 
ual effort,  and  even  local  cooperation,  became  insufficient,  both  as  to  methods  and 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  217 

capital,  to  supply  the  demand  for  water,  and  more  costly  and  complicated  ii-rigation 
systems  were  found  to  be  necessary.  Consequently  stock  companies  were  formed, 
and  large  amounts  of  capital  enlisted  in  irrigation  enterprises.  In  this  way  most  of 
the  waters  flowing  in  the  streams  were  "taken  up"  or  "appropriated,"  and  the 
importance  of  storage  of  the  flood  waters  to  meet  the  growing  need  became  evident. 

The  development  of  stock  companies  and  corporations  soon  grew  to  such  propor- 
tions that  a  new  danger  became  apparent.  A  monopoly  of  the  waters  available  for 
irrigation  was  threatened.  Great  systems,  involving  the  expenditure  of  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  dollars  or  even  millions,  were  practically  absorbing  all  sources  of 
water  for  irrigation.  The  farmers  found  themselves  at  the  mercy  of  water  com- 
panies, both  as  to  rates  charged  and  quantities  of  water  applied;  and  the  life  and 
growth  of  agricultural  communities  were  considered  in  jeopardy.  This  condition  of 
affairs  resulted  in  the  evolution  of  the  Wright  irrigation  law. 

This  law  seeks  to  establish  a  system  by  which  the  people  of  any  locality,  the 
lands  of  which  are  capable  of  irrigation  from  a  common  source,  may  form  an  irriga- 
tion district  on  a  basis  somewhat  similar  to  that  of  a  municipal  corporation.  The 
effects  of  this  law  on  irrigation  in  California  and  the  litigation  arising  under  it  will 
be  discussed  later  on. 

During  all  this  time  the  advantage  of  irrigation  was  becoming  more  firmly 
impressed  upon  California  farmers  and  orchardists.  With  numerous  excellent 
object  lessons  before  them,  they  abandoned  the  prejudices  formerly  held  against 
it  and  the  expense  and  labor  it  involves,  and  have  come  to  recognize  in  it  an  insur- 
ance not  only  of  a  crop  but  of  vastly  increased  production  from  the  same  fields 
and,  perhaps,  of  several  harvests  in  a  single  year.  As  a  result,  from  the  more  arid 
districts  of  southern  California,  where  it  naturally  began,  irrigation  has  spread 
rapidly  over  the  State  to  its  northern  boundaries,  and  even  over  localities  which  are 
credited  with  reasonable  rainfall. 

Following  closely  in  the  path  of  such  enterprise  has  come  a  wonderful  increase 
in  the  variety  and  yields  of  crops,  in  population  and  in  wealth.  Raisins,  wines,  citrus, 
and  other  fruits  have  supplanted  pastures,  wheat,  and  barley;  cities  and  towns  stand 
on  the  ground  of  the  old  lonely  farmhouse;  and  millions  in  bank  are  substituted  for 
the  ' '  promise  to  pay  "  of  unfortunate  farmers.  As  an  example  of  this  wonderful 
increase  in  population,  I  will  mention  only  seven  of  the  many  counties  practicing  irri- 
gation, viz:  Los  Angeles,  San  Diego,  San  Bernardino,  Kern,  Tulare,  Fresno,  and 
Merced.  In  1870  their  total  population  was  40,849,  and  their  combined  wealth 
$22,513,820.  In  1890  their  population  had  increased  to  296,719,  and  their  wealth  to 
$198,356,127;  or  the  population  had  multiplied  more  than  sevenfold  and  the  wealth 
ninefold. 

In  contrast  to  these  improved  districts  are  those  which  have  persistently  resisted 
irrigation.  They  have  not  advanced.  Often  they  have  gone  backward;  and  have 
retrograded  in  population  and  in  wealth. 

The  writer  believes  that  the  prominence  which  California  enjoys  is  largely  due 
to  irrigation ;  and  that  since  the  subsidence  of  the  gold  fever  her  progress  and  pros- 
perity have  been  coincident  with  the  production  of  the  great  variety  and  quantity 
of  her  crops  resulting  from  the  wise  and  skillful  irrigation  of  her  soil. 

Turning  now  to  the  San  Joaquin  Vallej-,  we  find  that  Fresno  County,  in  the  center 


218  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley,  is,  perhaps,  one  of  the  best  illustrations  in  California  of 
the  benefits  of  irrigation  and  of  the  transformation  which  ma}7  be  wrought  by  the 
wise  and  liberal  use  of  water  in  irrigation.  In  1871  a  colony  was  established  in  that 
county  which  cultivated  and  irrigated  vineyards,  producing  raisin  grapes.  Since 
that  time  the  population  has  increased  from  a  few  hundreds  to  over  100,000  people, 
and  now  some  of  the  most  beautiful  and  productive  orchards  and  vineyards  in  the 
whole  State  are  to  be  found  in  that  portion  of  the  valley.  More  than  twenty  colonies 
have  been  established  in  the  same  locality,  and  nearly  twenty  main  irrigation  canals, 
having  a  length  of  about  800  miles  have  been  constructed.  Their  branches  have  an 
aggregate  length  of  about  2,000  miles.  In  this  county  alone  nearly  half  a  million 
acres  are  under  cultivation;  and  this  great  area,  which  formerly  was  capable  of  pro- 
ducing only  sparse  crops  of  wheat,  or  pa.sturage  for  cattle,  now  markets  immense 
crops  of  raisins,  cereals,  and  alfalfa.  The  lands  which  formerly  were  of  little  value, 
are  now,  when  irrigated,  worth  from  $300  to  $1,000  per  acre.  And  like  results  in  a 
measure  have  been  obtained  in  every  district  in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  where  ample 
and  intelligent  irrigation  has  been  practiced. 

•  From  this  small  beginning  has  grown  up  a  great  system  of  canals  in  the  San 
Joaquin  Valley.  Those  drawing  their  waters  from  the  San  Joaquin  River  are  the 
Aliso,  Chowchilla,  Blyth,  and  East  Side  canals,  on  the  right,  or  easterly  bank;  and 
the  James,  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company's  canals, 
and  the  system  belonging  to  Miller  &  Lux,  on  the  left,  or  westerly  bank. 

Taking  water  from  the  Fresno  River,  one  of  the  most  important  branches  of  the 
San  Joaquin  in  the  contiguous  district,  are  the  canals  of  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irri- 
gation Company;  and  in  the  same  section  of  the  valley,  the  Sierra  Vista  Vineyard 
Company  and  the  Bliss  Canal  draw  their  supplies  from  Chowchilla  Creek,  another 
tributary  of  the  main  river. 

PHYSICAL  FEATURES  OF  THE  SAN  JOAftUIN  VALLEY. 
THE  SAN  JOAQUIN  RIVER. 

The  waters  of  San  Joaquin  River  are  the  union  of  the  streams  from  many  creeks 
and  branches  in  the  high  Sierras,  fed  by  the  rain  and  melting  snow  that  fall  upon  a 
mountainous  drainage  area  of  1,637  square  miles.  The  summit  range  of  the  Sierra 
Nevada  is  the  eastern  boundary  of  this  area,  which  extends  northerly  and  southerly 
for  more  than  70  miles.  The  river  flows  down  through  a  steep,  rugged  canyon,  in  a 
westerly  direction,  to  its  point  of  debouchment  upon  the  open  country  at  Pollasky 
(formerly  Hamptonville),  27  miles  northeast  from  Fresno.  From  this  point  it  con- 
tinues in  a  southwesterly  direction  for  55  miles  to  the  trough  of  the  San  Joaquin 
Valley.  Here  it  unites  with  the  waters  of  Fresno  Slough  in  a  swampy  region  subject 
to  overflow  and  turns  sharply  to  the  northwest.  From  this  junction  on  to  its  mouth, 
near  Antioch,  a  distance  of  120  miles,  it  is  the  main  river  of  the  great  valley,  and 
receives  the  drainage  of  the  latter  from  all  the  streams  on  either  side.  These  are 
numerous,  and  some  of  them  on  the  eastern  flank  of  the  valley,  deriving  their  waters 
principally  from  the  Sierra  Nevada's  rains  and  snows,  are  considerable  in  volume. 

As  a  rule,  these  tributary  streams  from  the  Sierras  lying  north  of  the  Upper 
San  Joaquin  run  in  deep  beds  for  many  miles  below  their  exit  from  the  mountains, 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  219 

and  come  to  the  level  of  the  great  plain  only  when  nearing  the  trough  of  the  valley. 
At  this  point  in  their  course  they  turn  northward  and  unite  with  the  main  stream — 
.-ome  as  distinct  branches:  others.  a>  in  the  case  of  the  smaller  ones,  through  swamps, 
sand-flat  deltas,  or  overflowed  tract-. 

Those  mimed  below  are  the  principal  streams  flowing  down  the  east  side  of  the 
valley,  us  enumerated  from  the  northerly  end.  with  the  drainage  area  of  each  given. 
The  -tream<  marked  with  an  asterisk  derive  their  waters  largely  from  the  melting 
snows  of  the  high  Sierras.  These  snows  arc  substitutes  for  extensive  storage  reser- 
voirs, and  slowly  yield  their  waters  throughout  our  early  springs  and  summers — the 
irrigation  season — in  an  unfailing  supply  of  irrigation  water.  The  remaining  streams 
of  the  list  have  their  sources  in  the  nearer  mountains  and  foothills,  and  are  replen- 
ished by  rains  rather  than  by  melting  snows,  and  in  consequence  are  torrential  in 
character,  intermittent  in  flow,  and  less  reliable  for  purposes  of  irrigation. 

Tributaries  of  the  San  Joaquin  River,  uiih  their  drainage  artat. 

Square  miles. 

Consnmne  River* 589 

Dry  Creek 208 

Mokelumne  River  * 573 

Calaveras  River* 390 

StanL-laus  River* 971 

Tnolumne  River* 1,514 

Merced  River* 1,072 

Bear  Creek • 153 

Maripoea  Creek 96 

Chowchilla  Creek  (orriver) 272 

Fresno  Creek  (or  river) 258 

San  Joaqnin  River* 1,637 

Kings  River* 1,853 

Keweah  River - 608 

Tule  River 446 

Deer  Creek 130 

White  River 96 

Poea  Creek 278 

Kera  River* -'.382 

Calient*  Creek 461 

Numerous  small  streams 2,138 


Total  area  of  mountain  and  hill  drainage 16,135 

On  the  western  slope  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  the  streams  originate  in  the  Coa-st 
Range  of  mountains.  They  are  torrential  and  intermittent  in  character.  The  stream 
beds  carry  water  but  a  few  hours  or  days  after  rainfall,  and  this  water  spreads  over 
the  upper  plain,  seldom  reaching  the  San  Joaquin.  The  streams  are  limited  in  sup- 
ply and  unreliable  for  irrigation.1 

From  Pollasky  for  a  distance  of  40  miles  downstream  the  river  winds  along 
through  low.  fertile,  and  productive  bottoms,  shut  in  by  bluffs,  with  hills  behind 
them.  The  river  gorge  in  this  length  varies  from  a  mile  to  a  half  mile  in  width. 
Behind  the  bluffs  and  hills  are  elevated  plains.  The.se  bluffs  diminish  in  height  above 
the  river  from  75  feet  near  Pollasky  to  40  feet  at  Herndon,  and  finally  disappear  at 

1  William  Hammond  Hall. 


220  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

a  distance  of  20  miles  from  that  place,  where  the  river  runs  into  the  Fresno  Swamp 
delta. 

The  entire  face  of  the  valley  trough  surrounding  the  Fresno  Swamp  and  the 
great  bend  of  the  San  Joaquin  River  is  often  submerged  during  the  floods,  and  below 
this  region  numerous  sloughs  break  out  from  the  San  Joaquin,  and,  after  running 
for  a  distance  in  the  same  general  direction,  reunite  with  it  lower  down,  thus  form- 
ing a  broad,  swampy  area,  often  submerged  and  generally  very  fertile. 

From  Pollasky  the  river  flows  over  alternating  beds  of  disintegrating  granite, 
interspersed  with  bowlders  and  coarse  gravel  and  broad,  flat  bars  of  sand.  Its 
channel  varies  in  width  from  300  to  900  feet,  and  also  greatly  according  to  the  stage  of 
the  river.  Its  descent  from  Pollasky  to  the  lower  plains  below  Herndon  is  quite 
rapid,  being  more  than  80  feet  in  the  20  miles.  From  this  point  its  fall  is  naturally 
more  gradual  as  it  passes  out  upon  the  nearly  level  plains,  being  only  36  feet  to  its 
union  with  the  waters  of  Fresno  Slough,  36  miles  farther  down. 

In  its  course  through  the  valley  trough  the  descent  of  the  river  is  still  more 
gradual,  and  in  times  of  low  water  it  winds  along  around  sand  bars  in  its  bed  or 
bordering  its  banks.  For  example,  the  straight  line  from  the  junction  of  the  river 
with  Fresno  Slough  to  the  head  of  Old  River,  where  it  separates  into  two  channels, 
is  87  miles  in  length,  but  the  river  between  those  points  develops  into  146  miles. 
Its  average  width  in  this  stretch  is  from  300  to  600  feet,  and  its  depth  from  bank 
top  to  bed  is  12- to  18  feet. 

The  river  bed  is  usually  covered  with  clean  siliceous  sand,  with  here  and  there 
an  outcropping  of  tenacious  clay.  The  banks  are  generally  of  a  tough  alluvial 
deposit,  and,  as  usual  with  streams  subject  to  floods,  are  slightly  higher  than  the 
lands  outside  of  them. 

The  course  of  the  river,  and  of  each  of  the  many  sloughs  which  drain  into  it,  may 
be  followed  by  the  thick,  luxuriant  growth  of  swamp  willows  which  lines  their  banks. 
On  the  higher  ground  cottonwoods  flourish,  and  oaks  are  scattered  at  intervals  over 
the  entire  district. 

As  may  be  readily  understood,  the  high,  steep  bluffs  on  either  side  of  the  upper 
reaches  of  the  river  have  offered  great  engineering  obstacles  to  the  diversion  of  water 
for  the  purposes  of  irrigation,  and  but  one  attempt  to  this  end  (which  resulted 
in  disastrous  failure)  has  been  made — that  by  the  Upper  San  Joaquin  River  Canal 
Company. 

The  flrst  feasible  point  along  the  river  from  which  water  may  be  easily  taken  for 
irrigation  without  the  building  of  a  long  line  of  canal  above  the  irrigable  district  is 
about  40  miles  below  Pollasky,  where  the  Aliso  Canal  diverts  water  from  the  river. 
From  this  point  down,  on  each  side  of  the  river,  the  high  banks  and  the  relatively 
low  plain  beyond  make  the  construction  of  irrigating  canals  easy;  and  it  is  from  this 
point  on  that  we  find  in  successful  operation  the  systems  of  canals  deriving  their 
water  from  this  river. 

THE  SOILS  IN  THE  DRAINAGE  AREA  OF  SAN  JOAaTJIN  RIVER. 

After  the  river  leaves  the  mountains,  as  before  described,  the  surface  of  the  land 
is  at  first  interspersed  with  outcroppings  of  primitive  rock.  The  soil  is  thin  and 
yields  only  scant  pasturage  and  is  nowhere  much  above  hardpan  or  bed  rock.  An 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  221 

exception  to  tho  above  condition  is  found  in  the  bottom  lands  of  the  river  from  Pol 
lasky  downstream.     These  are  composed  of  loose  sand  washings  and  river  sediment, 
mixed  with  clay  loam;  are  fertile,  readily  absorb  water,  and  are  easily  irrigated. 

As  we  proceed  southward  and  westward  along  the  river  the  rolling  lands  on 
either  side  are  lean,  compact,  dry  reddish  clay  and  igneous  mud  deposits,  with  "hog 
wallow"  formations  prominently  in  evidence.  The  hardpan  approaches  close  to  the 
surface  and  is  sometimes  bare.  The  soil  is  so  puddled  by  the  clay  ingredients  that 
it  is  almost  nonabsorbent  of  water;  and  irrigation,  particularly  by  means  of  lateral 
absorption  and  subirrigation,  is  almost  impossible.  Some  of  these  lands  are  summer 
fallowed,  and  thus  are  made  to  produce  fair  crops  of  cereals. 

As  we  move  farther  in  a  southwesterly  direction  into  the  plain  and  irrigation 
sphere  of  Kings  River  we  find  the  soil  deep,  absorbent  of  water,  and  remarkably  well 
adapted  to  the  best  methods  of  using  water  and  to  the  production  of  heavy  crops. 

This  character  of  soil  holds  except  within  a  strip  a  few  miles  in  width  south  of 
the  San  Joaquin.  On  the  north  bank  of  that  river  the  "  hog  wallows  "  and  rolling 
lands  run  far  down  into  the  valley,  and  owing  to  their  nonabsorbent  character  the 
country  is  difficult  to  irrigate,  except  in  small  areas  here  and  there  where  alluvial 
deposits  are  found.  This  condition  prevails  until  the  middle  plain  is  attained.  There 
the  high  river  banks  and  hills  are  left  behind;  the  plain  is  only  -iO  or  50  feet  above 
the  river  bed,  and  the  soils  on  either  side  are  looser,  lighter,  and  better  adapted  to 
irrigation.  On  the  south  side  they  are  deep,  sandy,  and  nearly  free  from  alkali. 
On  the  north  side  they  are  not  as  light,  with  the  exception  of  the  alluvial  spots  before 
mentioned.  The  surface  is  somewhat  rolling,  and  often  contains  spots  of  alkaline 
soil.  The  depth  to  hardpan  is  not  great,  and  altogether  the  soil  is  not  as  fertile  nor 
as  easily  cultivated  and  irrigated  as  on  the  south  side  of  the  river  in  Kings  River 
domain. 

As  we  proceed  toward  the  lower  plain  and  the  trough  of  the  San  Joaquin  we 
encounter  soils  varied  in  constitution  in  different  localities,  often  changing  quickly 
within  limited  areas,  being  sometimes  black  adobe,  then  loose,  sandy  loam  and  river 
sediment,  and  again  hard,  alkali  soil  and  compact  hardened  clay  loam. 

The  lowest  valley  trough  is  subject  to  occasional  overflow  from  the  river,  and  in 
some  parts  to  annual  inundation. 

Dr.  E.  W.  Hilgard,  professor  of  agriculture  in  the  University  of  California,  says 
of  the  soils  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley.1 

The  higher  plains  have  very  uniformly,  from  Kern  County  to  Stanislaus,  a  very  sandy  loam  soil  of 
great  depth,  and  almost  everywhere  made  of  granite  debris  instead  of  quartz  grains;  hence,  continu- 
ally increasing  their  stores  of  mineral  plant  food  by  the  weathering  of  the  minerals  present,  a  process 
which  in  so  porous  a  material,  subject,  in  its  natural  condition,  to  the  free  access  of  air  during  the 
greater  part  of  the  season,  was  evidently  very  rapid  and  as  a  consequence  has  developed  unusually 
large  amounts  of  the  soluble  products,  which  often  appear  in  an  inconvenient  abundance  in  the  guise 
of  alkali.  But  little  trouble  arises  from  this  cause  in  the  high-lying  sandy  tracts,  where  irrigation  or 
the  natural  rainfall  carries  the  soluble  salts  annually  into  the  country  drainage.  But  in  the  low-lying 
and  less  pervious  soils  of  swaleaand  valley  troughs,  which  are  at  the  same  time  intrinsically  the  richest 
in  available  mineral  plant  food,  the  accumulation  frequently  causes  considerable  trouble  and  difficulty. 
There  is  on  the  whole,  however,  but  little  of  the  heavier  class  of  adobe  soils  to  be  found  in  the  San 
Joaquin  Valley;  what  is  currently  so  designated  would  in  other  regions  sometimes  be  hardly  classed  as 

'California  Station  Ept.  1888-89,  pp.  115,  130. 


222  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

a  clay  loam.  The  narrow  belt  of  dark-colored  day,  or  adobe  land,  extends  from  the  neighborhood  of 
Mereed  City  toward  Stockton,  where,  northward  of  French  Camp  Slough  and  especially  westward  to 
the  Coast  Range,  really  heavy  adobe,  or  prairie  soils,  prevail  very  largely.  To  the  southward  of  the 
line  of  San  Joaquin  County  adobe  soils  are  found  only  in  the  river  trough,  and  the  soils  of  the  west  side 
are  prevalently  sandy  all  the  way  to  the  Tejon  Mountains.  *  *  * 

The  ancient  deposits  of  the  Kings  River  are  represented  by  the  "white  ash"  soils  of  the  Central, 
Washington,  f.nd  other  colonies;  while  those  of  the  San  Joaquin  side  are  reddish,  sandy  loams,  con- 
trasting pointedly  with  the  "white  ash"  lands.  This  distinction  is  said  to  be  maintained  to  a  greater 
or  less  extent  nearly  to  the  trough  or  edge  of  the  "tule"  belt  to  the  westward;  while  to  the  eastward 
of  Fresno  City  both  kinds  of  lands  run  out,  as  the  foothills  are  approached,  into  a  border  belt  of 
brownish  clay  loam  (here also  tailed  adobe). 

The  magnificent  results  of  irrigation  in  the  Fresno  region,  transforming  what  seemed  an  arid 
waste  into  a  maze  of  orchards,  vineyards,  and  fields,  showing  the  most  luxuriant  growth  of  a  great 
variety  of  products  of  the  warm,  temperate  zone,  can  not  readily  be  excelled  as  a  cogent  illustration  of 
the  benefits  of  irrigation  in  all  its  phases.  Owing  to  the  porous  nature  of  most  of  its  soils,  and  the  fact 
that  certain  portions  of  the  region  are  underlaid  by  more  or  less  compact  and  impervious  calcareous 
hardpan,  it  has  also  served  conspicuously,  in  times  past,  to  illustate  the  evils  of  overirrigation,  resulting 
in  the  temporary  "swamping"  of  lower  lying  lands  and  the  development  of  alkali  where  it  was  never 
known  before,  and  need  not  be  hereafter  under  a  rational  system  of  drainage. 

In  the  lower  lands  of  the  country  to  the  northward,  to  the  Fresno  plateau,  on  the  San  Joaquin 
and  Fresno  rivers,  as  well  as  on  Cottonwood  Creek,  we  again  find  soils  of  a  heavier  grade,  and  with 
large  supplies  of  mineral  plant  food. 

RAINFALL. 

Stated  roughly  and  in  round  numbers,  the  annual  precipitation  of  rain  and  snow 
on  the  high  Sierras  at  the  sources  of  San  Joaquin  River  has  a  mean  of  50  inches.  In 
the  lower  mountains  of  its  watershed  the  amount  falls  to  40  inches;  on  the  foothills  to 
30;  upon  the  higher  plain  to  20;  and  in  the  lowland  trough  of  the  river,  at  and  near  its 
great  turn  to  the  north,  to  10  inches;  from  which  locality  it  gradually  increases  in 
amount  as  we  proceed  down  the  valley  to  the  mouth  of  the  river. 

FLOW  OF  THE  RIVER. 

The  San  Joaquin  fluctuates  widely  in  the  course  of  the  year,  between  a  high  or 
flood  water  level  and  a  low  or  autumn  flow.  By  gagings  at  Hamptonville  (or  Pol- 
lasky)  and  also  at  Herndon,  the  maximum  flow  of  the  river  has  been  recorded  as 
high  as  59,800  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  months  of  greatest  flow  are  from  January 
to  July,  inclusive.  On  the  other  hand,  its  minimum  flow  has  fallen  as  low  as  150 
feet  at  Herndon.  The  months  from  August  to  October  include  the  period  of  low 
water.  In  the  winter  and  spring  months  the  average  discharge  approximates  to 
5,000  to  6,000  cubic  feet  per  second. 

CLIMATE. 

That  part  of  the  great  interior  valley  drained  by  San  Joaquin  River  contains 
11,000  square  miles.  Its  climate  is  quite  different  from  that  of  the  coast  regions  on 
the  west,  as  well  as  from  that  of  the  high  Sierras  on  the  east.  The  annual  rainfall 
is  light,  decreasing  gradually  from  an  average  of  about  12  inches  in  the  lower  valley 
near  Stockton,  to  about  5  inches  in  the  upper  part  near  liakersfield,  approximate!}' 
225  miles  distant. 

Its  atmosphere  is  very  dry,  particularly  during  the  summer  season;  and  con- 
sequently very  conducive  to  the  evaporation  of  water,  both  from  the  streams  and 
the  soil.  The  summer  temperature  is  very  high,  but,  owing  to  the  dryness  of  the 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVEB.  223 

air,  is  not  often  oppressive  or  injurious  to  the  health.  In  the  winter  season  there 
Is  little,  or  no  destructive  frost,  and  except  in  the  mountainous  districts,  no  large 
amount  of  ice  or  snow.  The  summer  nights  are  usually  clear,  and  owing  to  the 
uninterrupted  radiation  of  heat  and  the  descent  of  cold  air  from  the  Sierras,  are  cool 
and  comfortable. 

The  prevailing  winds  in  the  valley  are  from  the  north,  being  in  summer  time 
the  sea  breezes  of  the  coast  that  follow  the  river  and  lowland  levels,  and  which  come 
in  a  dried  and  tempered  condition  to  the  interior  valley.  In  both  summer  and  winter 
the  valley  is  occasionally  visited  by  "northers"  or  high  north  winds  which  blow 
with  considerable  velocity.  Those  of  summer  carry  great  volumes  of  desiccated  air 
over  the  entire  region,  abstracting  moisture  from  the  soil  and  vegetation  and  evapo- 
rating immense  quantities  of  water  from  canals  and  streams.  The  winter  "  northers  " 
are  usually  cold,  and  frequently  are  dry,  also. 

The  rain  is  usually  brought  by  a  warm  southerly  wind,  and  is  seldom  large  in 
amount. 

PRODUCTS. 

Originally  the  great  San  Joaquin  Valley  was  almost  entirely  cultivated  for 
enormous  crops  of  wheat,  the  farmers  relying  upon  winter  rains  for  the  natural  irri- 
gation of  the  soil,  or  on  summer  fallowing  to  eke  out  the  scanty  rainfall.  On  the 
west  side  of  the  valley  the  precipitation  is  often  deficient,  no  more  than  two  or  three 
crops  of  grain  in  five  years  being  probable  without  artificial  wetting  of  the  soil. 

As  irrigation  came  to  be  practiced  the  waters  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  of  the 
other  rivers  in  the  great  valley  were  carried  upon  the  fertile  lands  in  the  valley 
trough,  and  heavy  and  remunerative  crops  of  raisin  and  wine  grapes,  orchard  fruits, 
alfalfa,  and  the  cereals  were  produced,  as  well  as  good  pastures  for  immense  herds 
of  cattle;  and  it  soon  became  evident  that  much  of  the  valley  land  upon  which  irriga- 
tion water  could  easily  and  cheaply  be  introduced  was  too  valuable  for  the  produc- 
tion of  ordinary  and  single  crops  of  wheat  or  other  grain.  Consequently  such  areas 
were  speedily  converted  into  orchards  and  vineyards  or  into  alfalfa  fields  from  which 
three  to  five  crops  of*  the  rich  grass  could  be  harvested  each  year. 

IRRIGATED  TRACTS  IN  THE  VALLEY  AND  POSSIBLE  EXTENSIONS. 

The  Aliso  Canal,  highest  up  on  San  Joaquin  River  on  its  right  or  easterly  bank, 
and  owned  by  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  was  constructed  and  is  used  for  the 
purpose  of  irrigating  wild  grass  lands  in  the  river  bottom  of  that  locality.  It  im- 
proves the  pasturage  for  herds  of  cattle  belonging  to  the  corporation  and  it  irrigates 
an  area  of  about  3,000  acres.  Miller  &  Lux  intend  to  further  extend  this  irrigation. 

Next  below  Aliso,  on  the  same  bank,  is  the  Chowchilla  Canal,  belonging  to  the 
California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company.  It  was  constructed  to  irrigate  the 
lands  of  the  great  Chowchilla  Ranch,  containing  107,000  acres.  This  ranch  is  mainly 
utilized  for  the  pasturage  of  cattle  and  the  raising  of  swine,  but  3,300  acres  of  it  are 
cultivated  for  alfalfa,  000  acres  for  barley,  and  480  acres  for  grass.  Much  of  the 
land  in  the  Chowchilla  Ranch  is  unfertile;  nevertheless,'  with  a  large  supply  of  water 
a  greater  area  could  be  irrigated  and  improved.  This  supply,  however,  can  hardly 
be  obtained  except  by  using  a  portion  of  the  flood  flow  of  the  river,  either  by  means 


224  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

of  storage  or  irrigation  in  the  high-water  .season.  The  benefit  of  irrigation  in  this 
region  is  shown  by  the  well-known  fact  that  irrigated  lands  are  worth,  on  the 
average,  at  least  twenty-five  times  the  value  of  those  in  the  same  locality  which 
remain  unirrigated. 

Some  miles  below  the  Chowchilla  Canal,  on  the  same  bank  and  belonging  to  the 
same  company,  is  the  Blyth  Canal,  recently  constructed  for  irrigating  the  wild  grass 
lands  on  the  Chowchilla  Ranch.  It  is  a  short  canal,  0.75  of  a  mile  in  length,  and 
introduces  water  into  the  dry  bed  of  the  Fresno  River^  from  which  the  water  spreads 
out  upon  the  adjacent  plain  and  irrigates  9,000  acres  of  land.  With  a  sufficient 
water  supply  this  area  could  be  largely  extended  or  increased. 

Still  farther  down  on  the  right  bank  of  the  San  Joaquin  is  the  East  Side  Canal, 
sometimes  called  the  Stevenson-Mitchell  Canal,  which  irrigates  2,500  acres  of  land, 
distributed  as  to  crops  as  follows:  Alfalfa,  1,000  acres;  barley,  300  acres;  wheat, 
100  acres;  "hog  corn,"  100  acres;  pastures  and  wild  grasses,  1,000  acres.  Much 
more  land  in  the  vicinity  might  be  irrigated  with  a  greater  water  supply:  but  no 
storage  reservoirs  are  possible  in  this  locality,  and  only  by  winter  and  spring  flooding 
of  the  lands  and  storage  of  water  could  the  irrigated  areas  be  increased. 

On  the  westerly  or  left  bank  of  the  San  Joaquin  we  find,  first,  the  James  Canal, 
formerly  known  as  the  Enterprise  Canal.  It  is  owned  by  the  James  Canal  Company, 
which  possesses  a  large  ranch  of  65,000  acres,  lying  in  the  angle  between  San  Joaquin 
River  and  Fresno  Slough,  and  south  and  west  of  the  latter.  The  company  proposes 
to  irrigate  nearly  the  whole  of  this  tract,  either  for  pasture  lands  or  for  the  production 
of  alfalfa  or  cereals.  Thus  far,  -±2,650  acres  have  been  irrigated  from  the  canal;  but 
at  present  its  operation  is  enjoined  by  the  superior  court  of  Fresno  County  as  the 
result  of  a  suit  brought  against  the  company  by  Miller  &  Lux.  The  details  of  the 
litigation  will  be  given  hereafter. 

Next  on  the  river,  below  the  James  Canal,  is  the  largest,  most  complex  and 
extensive  system  taking  water  from  the  San  Joaquin.  It  is  known  as  the  San  Joaquin 
and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company.  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  arc 
the  principal  stockholders  in  this  company.  It  owns  the  "Main"  or  "Old  Canal," 
the  China  Slough,  and  Outside  Canal,  which  form  one  line;  the  Parallel  Canal  and 
the  Dos  Palos  Canal,  with  numerous  branches.  In  addition  to  these,  Miller  &  Lux 
own  independently  Poso  Slough,  Temple  Slough,  and  Santa  Rita  Canal,  which  are 
used  only  to  irrigate  ranches  belonging  to  that  corporation.  More  than  100,000  acre 
of  land  have  been,  at  one  time  or  another,  irrigated  by  this  entire  system,  and  in  each 
year,  on  the  average,  about  50,000  acres  are  thus  prepared  for  crops  of  alfalfa,  cereals, 
or  fruits.  In  addition  to  this  must  be  mentioned  the  immense  but  indefinite  areas  of 
wild  grass  lands  belonging  to  Miller  &  Lux,  which  are  flooded  by  the  high  waters  of 
the  river  taken  in  through  Poso  and  Temple  sloughs,  and  which  furnish  pasturage,  for 
cattle,  bred  and  raised  for  the  supply  of  the  San  Francisco  market.  With  the  present 
conditions  of  water  supply  it  seems  impracticable  for  this  company  and  corporation 
to  extend  their  irrigation  systems  very  considerably,  as  they  have  no  storage  reser- 
voirs, but  rely  upon  the  flow  9f  San  Joaquin  River  for  the  required  amount  of  water. 
The  length  of  their  supply  canals  already  reaches  87  miles,  and  these  have  branches 
amounting  in  all  to  over  200  miles  in  length.  With  an  increased  supply  of  water 
from  storage  this  side  of  the  valley,  the  west  side  plain,  for  a  much  greater  distance 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN   JOAQUIN    RIVER.  225 

down  toward  the  mouth  of  the  river,  might  be  successfully  and  profitably  irrigated, 
and,  in  fact,  the  area  of  land  under  the  ditches  and  the  crops  produced  could 
undoubtedly  be  multiplied  several  times. 

The  irrigation  possibilities  of  the  river,  so  far  as  the  ordinary  flow  is  concerned, 
seem  to  have  been  fully  exploited,  and  further  extension  of  irrigated  area  will  depend 
entirely  upon  the  storage  of  storm  and  flood  waters. 

Irrigation  along  San  Joaquin  River  is  practiced  both  for  the  wetting  of  barley 
and  alfalfa  tracts,  where  the  soil  is  too  alkaline  for  the  production  of  other  crops, 
and  for  the  cultivation  of  various  cereals,  grapes,  and  orchard  fruits  where  the  absence 
of  alkali  permits.  It  is  also  used  to  improve  the  pasturage  on  the  wild  grass  lands 
in  the  river  bottom. 

This  list  includes  all  the  irrigation  systems  taking  water  from  San  Joaquin 
River  and  the  lands  irrigable  therefrom;  but,  as  Fresno  River  and  Chowchilla  Creek 
are  natural  tributaries  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  are  in  close  proximity  to  it,  I  shall 
include  in  this  report  descriptions  of  these  streams  and  of  the  lauds  which  may  be 
irrigated  from  them. 

FRESNO  RIVER. 

This  river  has  a  drainage  area  of  272  square  miles.  Its  sources  are  in  the  lower 
mountains  and  foothills  on  the  east  side  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley;  consequently  it 
is  fed  principally  by  the  rains  which  fall  upon  these  elevated  lands,  and  derives 
comparatively  little  of  its  water  from  melted  snow;  therefore,  it  is  a  torrential 
stream,  subject  to  great  and  sudden  floods,  and  afterwards  usually  quickly  subsides 
into  ordinary  flow,  or  even  a  dry  state.  The  months  in  which  the  greatest  flow 
occurs  are  December  to  June,  inclusive.  During  the  remainder  of  the  year  its  bed 
is  nearly  or  quite  dry. 

Records  available  show  a  monthly  mean  flow  sometimes  as  great  as  1,632  cubic 
feet  per  second;  but  the  general  average  is  much  lower  than  that,  running  from  200 
to  500  cubic  feet  per  second  during  the  wet  months. 

The  waters  of  this  river,  carried  in  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company's 
ditches,  are  used  first  to  irrigate  alfalfa  on  from  100  to  300  acres  of  land  on  the  Adobe 
Ranch,  10  miles  above  the  town  of  Madera.  This  area  could  be  increased,  probably, 
to  1,000  acres,  by  a  sufficient  water  supply.  The  main  field  of  distribution  from  the 
canal  is  upon  what  was  formerty  known  as  the  Howard  &  Wilson  Colony  lands,  about 
a  mile  below  or  southwesterly  from  the  town  of  Madera.  About  40,000  acres  of 
irrigable  land  lie  under  the  ditches  of  this  company,  of  which  one-half  .have  been 
irrigated  at  different  times.  The  maximum  area  irrigated  in  any  one  year  has  been 
14,000  acres.  During  last  year — 1899-1900 — the  company  watered  7,100  acres. 
As  the  water  supply  for  this  canal  is  limited,  the  irrigated  area  depends  largely  upon 
the  amount  of  the  rainfall  and  the  resulting  quantity  of  water  flowing  in  the  river. 
With  ample  storage  capacity,  the  entire  40,000  acres  of  land  might  easily  be  irrigated, 
and  to  great  advantage.  In  fact,  there  is  a  very  large  area  of  land  lying  beyond  this 
colony,  to  the  south  and  west,  which  might  easily  be  brought  under  the  ditches,  if 
water  were  available.  This  company  is  already  preparing  to  improve  its  canal  sys- 
tem and  to  greatly  increase  its  storage  power.  The  particular  crops  produced  in 
1899-1900  were:  Wheat,  300  acres;  barley,  600  acres;  grass  and  alfalfa,  3,000  acres; 
vineyards,  2,000  acres;  orchard  trees,  1,000  acres;  Egyptian  corn,  200  acres. 
23856— No.  100—01 15 


226  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

CHOWCHILLA  CREEK. 

Chowchilla  Creek  is  similar  in  origin  and  characteristics  to  Fresno  River,  already 
described.  It  has  a  drainage  area  of  268  square  miles,  and.  like  the  Fresno,  is  sub- 
ject to  sudden  freshets  in  the  rainy  season.  Records  have  given  it  a  mean  monthly 
flow  as  high  as  1,608  cubic  feet  per  second,  but  its  average  during  the  months  from 
December  to  July,  inclusive,  is  far  below  that  amount,  being  approximately  150  cubic 
feet  per  second.  The  months  from  February  to  June,  inclusive,  furnish  the  greatest 
flow,  averaging  333  cubic  feet  per  second;  but  the  months  from  July  to  October, 
inclusive,  ordinarily  afford  little  or  no  water. 

The  only  irrigation  systems  on  Chowchilla  Creek  are  those  of  the  Sierra  Vista 
Vineyard  Company  and  the  Bliss  ditches.  By  means  of  dams  across  the  bed  of  the 
creek  they  utilize  the  flow  of  the  stream  to  irrigate  some  6,000  or  8,000  acres  of  land 
lying  on  either  side  of  the  stream,  upon  which  vineyards,  fruit  trees,  alfalfa,  and 
pasture  lands  are  cultivated  or  improved.  The  area  irrigated  in  any  one  year  is 
largely  dependent  upon  the  rainfall  and  the  resulting  water  supply  in  the  creek.  The 
irrigated  area  might  be  largely  increased  by  multiplying  the  number  of  dams  and 
thus  establishing  a  series  of  impounding  reservoirs  in  the  bed  of  the  stream.  As  it 
is,  during  freshets,  much  water  must  be  turned  aside  into  the  beds  of  Berenda  and  Ash 
sloughs  in  order  to  avoid  the  destruction  of  the  dams.  Such  new  impounding  dams 
should  have  stability  sufficient  to  resist  destruction  by  sudden  floods  and  freshets. 
There  are,  also,  one  or  two  excellent  reservoir  sites  in  the  mountains  above  Buchanan, 
where  large  quantities  of  water  might  be  stored. 

The  valley  lands  adjacent  to  the  San  Joaquin  and  its  branches,  now  being  irri- 
gated by  existing  canals,  approximate  120,000  acres  in  cereals,  fruits,  and  alfalfa, 
and  the  area  of  wild  grass  lands  which  are  overflowed  by  the  flood  waters  of  the  river 
is  fully  double  this  amount. 

ESTIMATE   OF  TOTAL   AREA   OF  LAND  WHICH   MIGHT  BE   IRRIGATED  FROM 
SAN  JOAQUIN  AND  FRESNO  RIVERS  AND  CHOWCHILLA  CREEK. 

In  making  this  estimate  I  proceed  on  the  assumption  that  the  duty  of  water  in 
this  region,  the  valley  trough,  is  approximately  160  acres  per  cubic  foot  per  second. 
I  assume  this  duty  because  no  positive  and  definite  information  has  been  available  as 
to  the  exact  duty  of  water  on  the  different  irrigated  areas  investigated  by  me,  but  the 
general  consensus  of  opinion  among  canal  owners,  ranch  owners,  and  canal  superin- 
tendents is  that  the  above  is  a  fair  approximate  average  of  the  duty  of  water. 

I  find  from  Hall's  tables  of  flow  of  water  in  San  Joaquin  River,  established  by 
gagings  from  1878  to  1884,  inclusive,  that  the  average  number  of  cubic  feet  per 
second  for  the  period  from  November  to  January,  inclusive,  is  750,  which,  upon  the 
assumption  that  a  cubic  foot  per  second  will  irrigate  160  acres  of  land,  would,  during 
this  period,  properly  irrigate  120,000  acres  of  land  if  all  the  water  flowing  were  avail- 
able for  irrigation.  In  the  same  way  the  average  flow  for  the  period  from  February 
to  April,  inclusive,  being  2,462  cubic  feet  per  second,  would  serve  393,920  acres;  in 
the  period  from  May  to  June,  inclusive,  the  mean  of  about  7,458  cubic  feet  per 
second  would  irrigate  1,193,280  acres,  and  during  August  to  October,  inclusive,  tha 
808  cubic  feet  per  second,  average  mean  flow,  would  irrigate  129,280  acres  of  land. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  227 

Under  the  supposition  that  this  water  could  be  stored  and  dealt  out  throughout 
the  year  as  might  be  necessary,  it  would  furnish  3,074  cubic  feet  per  second,  and 
would,  according  to  my  assumption,  irrigate  fully  490,000  acres,  instead  of  120,000 
(omitting  the  wild  grass  lands,  indefinite  in  extent)  which  are  irrigated  at  the  present 
time.  In  other  words,  more  than  four  times  the  present  irrigated  area  might  be 
brought  into  the  watered  region  with  a  corresponding  increase  in  values  and  pro- 
ductiveness. 

As  the  flow  here  given  is  only  the  average  during  six  years,  and  is  greatly  in 
excess  in  some  months  and  deficient  in  others,  the  necessity  for  ample  storage  is 
apparent. 

The  gagings  of  Fresno  River  for  the  same  years  show  that  in  the  period  from 
November  to  January,  inclusive,  the  average  flow  is  66  cubic  feet  per  second,  which, 
with  a  duty  of  160  acres  per  cubic  foot  per  second,  would  serve  during  this  period 
10,560  acres.  In  the  interval  from  Februa'ry  to  April,  inclusive,  the  average  flow  is 
482  cubic  feet  per  second,  which,  on  the  same  basis,  would  serve  77,120  acres.  From 
May  to  June,  inclusive,  127  cubic  feet  per  second,  the  average  flow,  supposing  all 
the  water  to  be  available,  would  provide  for  20,320  acres.  In  the  period  from  August 
to  October,  inclusive,  the  flow  is  given  as  3  cubic  feet  per  second,  which  would  irri- 
gate only  480  acres.  In  the  same  way,  as  before  explained,  if  the  entire  flow  of  the 
river,  which  averages  160  cubic  feet  per  second  throughout  the  year,  could  be  stored 
and  dealt  out  as  required  it  would  provide  for  25,6UO  acres,  instead  of  the  average 
of  10,000  acres,  or  an  area  over  two  and  one-half  times  as  great  as  is  at  present 
irrigated.  As  in  the  case  of  the  San  Joaquin,  the  necessity  for  ample  storage  is 
apparent.  The  irrigated  region  might  well  be  extended  in  a  direction  southerly 
and  westerly  from  the  town  of  Madera. 

The  records  of  the  flow  of  Chowchilla  Creek  during  the  years  1878  to  1884  give 
for  the  period  from  November  to  January,  inclusive,  a  mean  discharge  of  44  cubic 
feet  per  second,  which,  on  our  assumption,  should  provide  for  7,040  acres  during 
that  period.  From  February  to  April,  inclusive,  456  cubic  feet  per  second  is  the 
mean  flow,  which  should  provide  for  72,960  acres.  From  May  to  June,  inclusive, 
the  mean  flow  of  118  cubic  feet  per  second  should  provide  for  18,880  acres,  and  from 
August  to  October,  inclusive,  2  cubic  feet  per  second  would  provide  for  only  320 
acres.  By  storing  and  regulating  the  supply  as  before  described,  about  24,640  acres 
might  be  irrigated  throughout  the  year  instead  of  5,000  or  6,000  acres  during  a  few 
months  of  each  year,  as  now. 

At  present  much  of  the  freshet  water  of  the  Chowchilla  is  lost  to  irrigation  by 
being  turned  aside  into  Ash  and  Berenda  and  other  sloughs  in  order  to  prevent  the 
destruction  of  the  dams  yet  remaining  intact.  The  advantages  of  storage  and  con- 
tinuous supply  in  these  cases  seem  very  evident,  and  as  the  soil  and  topography  of 
these  localities  are  peculiarly  suited  to  irrigation  the  irrigable  area  might  be  largely 
increased,  probably  by  15,000  acres. 


228  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Under  the  assumption    which   I  have  made,  it  is  possible  to  increase,  through 
storage  of  flood  waters,  the  irrigable  lands  on  the  streams  mentioned,  as  follows: 

Possible  extension  of  irrigated  area  under  San  Jiiin/nin  mul  l'r<'xn<>  /•/>./•.•<  nml  <  'li/in-chilla  Creel:. 


Stream. 

I'lVsvnt 

area. 

Possible 
area. 

Acres. 
120,000 

Acres. 
490,000 

•    10,000 

25,600 

6,000 

24,640 

136,  000 

540,240 

Of  course,  in  this  computation  we  have  taken  no  account  of  the  loss  of  water 
from  percolation  into  the  soil,  or  by  evaporation  in  storage  reservoirs;  but  this  would 
be  relatively  small  in  amount. 

APPROPRIATION  AND  DISTRIBUTION  OF  WATER. 

The  right  to  the  use  of  water  from  streams  in  California  may  inhere  in  the 
riparian  proprietor  or  may  be  acquired  by  complying  with  the  statutes  of  the  State 
for  the  appropriation  of  water.  Rights  to  water  acquired  under  the  civil,  Spanish, 
or  Mexican  laws  before  California  came  under  the  control  of  the  United  States  are 
guaranteed  and  protected  to  the  fullest  extent.  Appropriations  of  water  must  be  for 
a  beneficial  purpose. 

The  method  of  appropriating  water  as  described  in  the  statutes  is-as  follows: 
SEC.  1415.  A  person  desiring  to  appropriate  water  must  post  a  notice,  in  writing,  in  a  conspicuous 
place  at  the  point  of  intended  diversion,  stating  therein: 

(1)  That  he  claims  the  water  there  flowing  to  the  extent  of  (giving  the  number)  inches  measured 
under  a  4-inch  pressure. 

(2)  The  purpose  for  which  he  claims  it,  and  the  place  of  intended  use. 

(3)  The  means  by  which  he  intends  to  divert  it,  and  the  size  of  the  flume,  ditch,  pipe,  or  aqueduct 
in  which  he  intends  to  divert  it. 

A  copy  of  the  notice  must,  within  ten  days  after  it  is  posted,  be  recorded  in  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  posted. 

In  order  to  determine  the  amount  of  water  "filed  on"  and  appropriated  from 
San  Joaquin  River,  Fresno  River,  and  Chowchilla  Creek,  respectively,  I  studied  the 
records  of  water  claims  filed  in  the  offices  of  the  county  recorders  of  Fresno,  Madera, 
and  Merced  counties,  first  having  ascertained  that  those  were  the  only  counties  in 
which  water  for  irrigation  was  claimed  by  appropriators  from  these  streams;  and 
also  made  diligent  inquiry  among  irrigators  and  old  residents  interested  and  well 
informed  as  to  irrigation  matters.  I  found  filings  on  water  made  as  far  back  as  1857. 
These  very  early  claims  were  usually  for  water  to  be  used  in  mining  and  milling  ores, 
and  were  made  at  points  in  the  mountainous  regions  around  the  sources  of  the  San 
Joaquin.  These  early  records  were  often  very  indefinite  both  as  to  the  location  of 
claims  and  the  amount  of  water  appropriated;  but  probably  in  the  ordinary  case  the 
water  claimed  was,  after  use,  turned  back  into  the  stream.  It  would  have  been 
practically  impossible,  however,  at  a  later  date  for  another  person  to  decide  upon 
either  the  validity  of  the  claim  or  the  locality  in  which  it  was  made,  owing  to  the 
looseness  of  the  description. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  229 

In  endeavoring  to  determine  the  amount  of  water  appropriated  on  each  of  the 
streams  under  consideration,  seven  large  volumes  of  water  claims  and  one  volume  of 
the  records  of  the  board  of  supervisors  of  Fresno  County  had  to  be  carefully  gone 
over  and,  as  far  as  possible,  the  streams,  branches,  tributaries,  and  claims  identified. 
In  many  cases  forks,  branches,  and  small  tributaries  were  mentioned  and  water 
claimed  therefrom  by  persons  whose  names  were  unknown  not  only  to  the  county 
recorder  and  his  deputies  but  to  the  county  surveyor  and  his  predecessors  in  office 
and  even  to  the  "oldest  inhabitant"  of  the  region  supposed  to  be  the  locality 
specified.  Again,  in  the  wording  of  the  claim  no  statement  would  be  found  as  to 
whether  the  stream  on  which  water  was  claimed  was  a  tributary  of  the  San  Joaquin 
or  of  some  other  river,  and  since  the  filing  of  the  claim  the  name  of  the  stream 
might  have  been  changed  once,  if  not  oftener.  The  miners  and  irrigators  in  the 
early  days  gave  fanciful  and  arbitrary  names  to  streams,  gulches,  and  valleys,  which 
later  were  changed  and  in  time  forgotten. - 

Another  confusing  feature  was  the  fact  that  a  great  number  of  streams  bore  the 
same  name,  as,  for  instance,  a  great  favorite,  Whisky  Creek,  and  also  Jackass  Creek, 
Bear  Creek,  Mill  Creek,  etc.  Some  of  the  streams  bearing  these  names  were  tribu- 
taries of  the  San  Joaquin  and  others  of  Kings  River.  It  was  necessary  to  look  up  on 
the  map  the  section,  township,  and  range  in  which  the  claim  was  located  in  order  to 
decide  whether  the  stream  named  was  a  tributary  of  the  San  Joaquin  or  of  some 
other  river.  When,  as  was  often  the  case,  no  section,  township,  or  range  was  men- 
tioned, it  was  practically  impossible  to  locate  the  claim  unless  some  natural  object — 
such  as  a  ranch,  bridge,  or  abandoned  mine — was  mentioned  which  happened  to  be 
known  by  some  person  questioned  by  us.  There  were  also  numbers  of  claims  on 
streams  which  had  at  one  time  or  another  been  tributaries  of  the  San  Joaquin,  but 
had  since  been  diverted  or  had  sunk  into  the  sands  to  disappear  before  reaching  the 
main  stream.  It  was  necessary  to  look  up  these  streams  and  ascertain  by  inquiry 
whether  any  of  their  water,  in  times  of  flood,  still  reached  the  San  Joaquin. 

Many  tributaries  of  this  river  on  which  claims  were  located  did  not  appear  at  all 
on  maps  of  the  county,  and  could  be  "run  down"  only  by  close  inquiry  among 
miners,  mountaineers,  sheep  men,  and  State  forest  or  fish  commissioners  who  were 
familiar  with  the  ground.  Some  claims  on  Minaret  Creek  had  eluded  our  closest 
scrutiny,  and  we  had  about  decided  to  pass  them  as  not  belonging  to  the  San  Joaquin 
when  fortunately  we  met  a  fish  commissioner  who  knew  the  locality  and  was  able  to 
inform  us  that  the  creek  in  question  was  quite  a  bold  stream  and  an  undoubted 
tributary. 

The  ignorance  of  standards  of  measurement  of  flowing  water,  even  in  cases  of 
corporations  appropriating  large  amounts,  was  very  evident  and  often  disagreeably 
prominent.  Square  inches  and  square  feet  of  water  were  often  claimed,  as  well  as 
"cubic  inches"  and  "cubic  feet"  under  a  4-inch  pressure;  and  the  powers  of  transla- 
tion of  the  writer  in  endeavoring  to  interpret  the  real  meaning  of  the  appropriator 
were  often  severely  taxed.  Again,  claims  to  immense  quantities  of  water,  ridicu- 
lously disproportionate  to  the  means  stated  for  diverting  them,  were  a  common 
feature;  and  claims  to  "all  the  waters  in  the  river"  or  to  millions  of  miner's  inches 
were  frequently  encountered  in  the  search  of  the  records. 

It  was  found  to  be  practically  impossible,  except  in  the  cases  of  the  few  existing 


230  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

canals,  to  ascertain  if  the  water  claimed  had  ever  been  used.  The  writer  can  con- 
ceive of  no  more  difficult  task  for  the  searcher  of  records  than  to  trace  and  pass 
upon  the  validity  of  almost  any  of  the  older  water  claims  filed  in  these  counties 
during  the  last  thirty  years,  naturally  the  result  of  the  careless  and  indefinite  statute- 
prescribing  the  form  and  method  of  appropriation. 

In  order  to  more  clearly  show  the  looseness  and  indefiniteness  in  claiming  water, 
I  give  herewith  some  extracts  from  the  records  in  each  of  the  three  counties. 

The  following  notice  is  an  example  of  indefiniteness  both  as  to  quantity  of  water 
claimed  and  of  the  locality  in  which  it  is  to  be  taken.  It  will  be  seen  also  that  no 
mention  is  made  of  the  point  where  the  water  is  to  be  used: 

Mill  Creek,  a  tributary  of  the  North  Fork  of  the  San  Joaquin.     Dated  June  20,  1878. 

I  hereby  give  notice  that  I  claim  2  feet  of  the  waters  of  Mill  Creek,  game  to  be  measured  under 
4-inch  pressure.  Said  water  to  be  used  for  irrigation  purposes.  Said  water  to  be  diverted  by  means 
of  a  ditch,  to  be  taken  out  of  said  Mill  Creek  at  a  point  about  10  yards  above  where  the  train  from 
Kidenhars  to  Hurses  crosses  Mill  Creek. 

Another  of  these  earlier  claims  is  as  follows: 

North  Fork  of  the  San  Joaquin.     Dated  the  8th  day  of  October,  1877. 

Know  all  men  whom  it  may  concern  that  I,  —  — ,  of  the  above-named  State  and  county, 

have  this  8th  day  of  October,  1877,  appropriated  and  claimed  all  the  water  for  1  mile  below  John 
Hern's  mill,  or  to  the  extent  of  5,000  cubic  inches,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  flowing  into  the 
North  Fork  of  the  San  Joaquin  River  in  Crane  Valley,  in  said  State  and  county,  to  be  used  as  stock 
water  and  for  agricultural  purposes,  to  remain  in  its  natural  channel,  along  with  the  privilege  of  divert- 
ing 1,000  cubic  inches,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  from  said  North  Fork,  at  any  point  most  con- 
venient, within  any  point  from  one-fourth  to  1  mile  below  John  Hern's  mill,  in  said  State  and  county 
and  valley,  to  be  conducted  from  said  channel  by  ditch  and  flume  of  3  feet  wide  and  2  feet  deep. 

Recorded  18th  of  October,  1877,  in  Book  A  of  Water  Rights  Records  of  Fresno  County,  Cal., 
page  121. 

Fine  Gold  Gulch,  a  tributary  of  the  San  Joaquin.    Dated  27th  day  of  April,  1878. 

Notice  is  hereby  given  that  we  claim  the  waters  of  this  stream  and  all  its  tributaries  from  this 
point  up,  to  the  amount  of  5,000  cubic  inches  of  water,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  for  mining 
purposes.  The  original  of  this  notice  is  posted  on  a  white-oak  tree  on  the  south  bank  of  the  north 
fork  of  the  stream  of  water  known  as  Fine  Gold  (Gulch  ?) ,  about  3  miles  northerly  from  the  residence 
of  J.  B.,  in  Fresno  County,  Cal.,  and  is  located  this  27th  day  of  April,  A.  D.  1878. 

If  all  the  tributaries  of  this  stream  are  definitely  known  in  position  on  the  map 
and  in  the  country,  and  we  know  exactly  what  appropriators  mean  by  ' '  cubic  inches 
of  water,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure;"  and  if  there  are  no  other  white-oak 
trees  in  that  vicinity;  or  if  the  white-oak  tree  has  not  been  cut  down,  blown  down 
by  the  wind,  or  struck  by  lightning;  and  if  "3  miles  northerly  from  the  residence  of 
J.  B."  means  exactly  3  miles  in  exactly  a  north  direction;  and  if  J.  B.  has  not  moved 
away  so  long  ago  that  he  is  forgotten,  then  we  may  regard  this  location  as  a  very 
exact  and  definite  one.  But  otherwise  it  would  probably  be  very  difficult  to  deter- 
mine the  point  where  this  appropriation  was  made,  with  a  view  of  ascertaining 
whether  the  water  claimed  was  actually  used.  And  if  we  could  not  interview  the 
three  appropriators,  we  might  still  be  left  in  doubt  as  to  the  amount  of  water  claimed. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  231 

Snnlli  In-n  iii-li  of  Kaiier  Creek.     Dated  March  29,  1881. 

Notice  of  location:  Notice  is  hereby  given  that  we,  the  undersigned  persons,  claim  400  inches  of 
the  water  of  this  creek,  where  this  notice  is  posted,  this  creek  being  one  of  the  south  branches  of  the 
Kaiser  Creek.  The  water  is  to  be  taken  out  where  this  notice  is  posted  and  conveyed  in  a  flume  and 
ditch  to  the  side  of  the  ridge  next  to  Kaiser  Creek,  and  used  in  hydraulic  and  "min."  purposes,  and 
returned  to  its  original  channel  about  2  miles  below. 

Dated  at  Kaiser  Creek,  Fresno  County,  Cal.,  March  29,  1881. 

V.  B.  C.  claims  "The  water  of  the  San  Joaquin  River  *  *  *  to  the  extent  of  51,840  cubic 
inches,  under  a  4-inch  pressure." 

San  Joaquin  River.     Dated  October  SO,  1887. 

Notice. — Notice  is  hereby  given  that  we  claim  the  waters  of  the  San  Joaquin  River  to  the  extent 
of  a  flow  of  3,456,000  cubic  inches  under  a  pressure  of  4  inches;  that  we  intend  to  use  said  water  for 
irrigation,  navigation,  domestic,  and  manufacturing  purposes;  that  we  intend  to  use  said  water  on 
the  east  of  the  San  Joaquin  River  and  on  the  west  of  the  foothills  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains, 
and  in  the  counties  of  Fresno,  Merced,  and  Stanislaus.;  that  the  course  of  the  canal  will  be  easterly 
and  northerly;  that  we  intend  to  construct  a  canal  of  sufficient  size  and  capacity,  to  be  not  less  than 
60  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  nor  less  than  75  feet  wide  on  the  top,  and  to  be  7  feet  deep,  reckoning  from 
the  grade  to  the  top  of  the  embankment.  (The  point  of  diversion  of  said  water  is  on  the  right  or  east 
bank  of  the  San  Joaquin  River,  at  or  near  the  end  of  a  large  slough,  at  or  near  where  this  notice  is  posted. ) 

Fresno  County,  October  29, 1887. 

Recorded  November  4,  1887,  in  Book  B  of  Water  Rights  Records  of  Fresno  County,  Cal.,  pages 
50-51. 

A.  B.  and  J.  B.  claimed  "500  inches,  miner's  measurement,  under  a  4-inch  pres- 
sure, or  all  of  the  waters  of  this  Willow  or  North  Fork  Creek.  *  The  point 
at  which  we  take  the  waters  of  said  stream  for  the  purposes  aforesaid  is  about  20  feet 
in  a  southeasterly  direction  from  a  certain  yellow-pine  tree  marked  B.  D.,  on  the 
west  bank  of  said  stream,  and  on  which  this  notice  is  posted,  and  about  14  feet  in  an 
easterly  direction  from  a  certain  white  live-oak  tree,  also  marked  B.  D. ,  on  the  west  bank 
of  said  stream."  *  *  It  is  hoped  that  these  trees  are  not  situated  in  the  forest, 
and  that  they  still  remain  standing,  although  probably  the  "B.  D.'s"  are"  now  illegible. 

Fifteen  miners  claim  250  feet  of-  the  water  under  a  4-inch  pressure  from  the  south 
branch  of  the  South  Fork  of  the  San  Joaquin.  Probably  they  knew  what  they  meant 
by  250  feet  of  water  under  a  4-inch  pressure.  '  But  it  is  very  doubtful  if  H.  N.  B. 
did  know  exactly  what  he  meant  by  claiming  "4  square  feet  of  the  water  of  Whisky 
Creek,  measured  under  a  4- inch  pressure." 

On  the  Chowchilla  Creek,  4,000  and  20,000  cubic  inches,  measured  under  a  4-inch 
pressure,  are  claimed. 

The  K.  C.  A.,  and  J.  P.  and  W.  M.  propose  to  take  out  5,000  miner's  inches, 
under  a  4-inch  pressure,  from  the  San  Joaquin  River,  or  100  feet  of  water;  but  to 
make  sure  that  they  can  transport  this  quantity,  they  propose  to  make  a  canal  150 
feet  wide  and  6  feet  deep,  which,  even  with  a  velocity  of  1  foot  a  second,  would 
transport  900  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second — a  large  river  in  itself. 

M.  J.  B.  and  E.  B.  propose  to  take  5,000  miner's  inches  of  water  from  the  San 
Joaquin  River  and  transport  it  in  a  ditch  2  feet  on  the  bottom,  4  .feet  on  top,  and  3 
deep,  with  a  grade  of  16  feet  to  the  mile.  As  the  area  of  cross  section  of  the  ditch 
through  which  this  100  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  must  pass  is  only  9  square  feet, 
the  water  must  have  a  velocity  of  more  than  11  feet  a  second,  and  therefore  M.  J.  B. 
and  R.  B.  should  carefully  line  their  ditch  with  cast  iron,  in  order  that  it  may  not  be 
washed  away  at  the  tirst  rush. 


232  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

These  notices,  taken  at  random  from  nearly  400  on  record,  illustrate  the  discrep- 
ancies which  arise  in  the  practice  of  hydraulics,  as  well  as  the  uncertainties  of  appro- 
priations under  the  existing  prescriptions  in  the  statutes. 

SUMMARY. 

The  number  of  claims  of  water  from  the  San  Joaquin  and  its  branches  is  316,  not 
including  those  from  Fresno  River  and  Chowchilla  Creek. 

"All  water  flowing  in  the  San  Joaquin  River''  is  claimed  in  so  many  words  1>\ 
different  persons  six  times,  in  addition  to  a  total  of  461,794  cubic  feet,  omitting  all 
reappropriations.  "All  the  flow"  in  many  of  the  branches  and  forks  of  the  San 
Joaquin  was  claimed  over  and  over  again;  as,  for  example,  Big  Sandy,  Whisky 
Creek,  and  Stevenson  Creek. 

The  greatest  flood  flow,  for  even  a  short  time,  of  the  San  Joaquin  River,  according 
to  gagings  during  eight  and  one-half  years  by  William  Hammond  Hall  and  J.  B. 
Lippincott,  is  59,800  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  therefore  the  claims  of  water  above 
given  are  nearly  eight  times  the  greatest  flood  flow  of  the  river  during  this  eight  and 
one-half  years  specified,  and  are  172  times  the  average  flow  per  second,  2,680  cubic 
feet,  during  the  period  mentioned.  Of  course,  we  must  add  to  this  total  the  sixfold 
claim  of  "all  water  of  the  river."  As  the  water  of  the  San  Joaquin  is  not  in  the 
condition  of  an  elastic  vapor,  one  experiences  great  difficult3T  in  understanding  how 
all  these  claims  could  be  satisfied. 

On  Fresno  River  and  its  tributaries  50  claims  of  water  have  been  made.  Besides 
670,799  miner's  inches,  or  13,416  cubic  feet  per  second,  filed  on,  "all  the  water  of 
Fresno  River"  was  in  addition  claimed  once.  In  five  instances  the  quantity  was  not 
mentioned,  and  might  have  been  anything  from  1  miner's  inch  to  the  entire  stream; 
and  in  another  instance  "enough  water"  was  claimed,  and  only  specified  by  the 
dimensions  of  the  flume,  namely,  a  flume  30  feet  wide,  4  feet  deep,  and  having  a  fall 
of  5  feet  per  mile,  evidently  carrying  a  generous  quantity  of  water,  which  would 
have  left  comparatively  little  to  other  appropriators,  even  in  flood  season. 

The  waters  of  Coarse  Gold  Gulch,  one  of  the  tributaries  of  the  Fresno  River, 
were  separately  claimed  three  times' over,  in  addition  to  2,500  miner's  inches,  or  50 
cubic  feet  per  second.  This  being  a  small  stream,  dry  at  certain  seasons  of  the  year, 
the  writer  believes  that  some  of  the  claimants  must  occasionally  be  disappointed. 

Hall's  record  for  the  greatest  mean  rate  of  monthly  discharge  of  Fresno  River, 
during  six  years'  observation,  gives  1,632  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  therefore  the 
quantity  of  water  claimed,  in  addition  to  "all  the  water  of  the  river,"  is  eight  times 
this  greatest  mean  flow  per  second,  and  is  eighty  times  its  mean  3Tearly  discharge, 
160  cubic  feet  per  second. 

For  the  waters  of  Chowchilla  Creek  14  claims  have  been  made,  aggregating 
31,008  cubic  feet  per  second,  plus  two  claims  for  quantities  not  given.  The  gagings  of 
Chowchilla  by  William  Hammond  Hall  during  the  six  consecutive  years  before  speci- 
fied gave  the  greatest  flood  water  of  this  stream  during  that  period  as  10,770  cubic  feet 
per  second.  Therefore,  on  this  stream  three  times  the  amount  of  its  greatest  recorded 
flood  flow  per  second  has  been  claimed,  or  204  times  the  annual  uniform  flow  of  the 
creek,  which  was  152  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Of  the  total  number  of  claims  to  water  from  the  San  Joaquin  and  its  branches, 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER. 


233 


omitting  those  from  Fresno  River  and  Chowchilla  Creek,  at  least  115  of  the  total 
number  (31(>)  are  so  indefinitely  described  as  to  the  point  of  appropriation  or  diver- 
sion that  it  would  be  exceedingly  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  determine  that  point. 
None  refer  to  section,  township,  or  range  of  the  Government  survey,  and  we  find 
them  usually  oriented  by  means  of  natural  objects,  as  trees,  bowlders,  ranch  houses, 
etc.,  which  may  have  disappeared,  been  destroyed,  or  have  changed  owners. 

Of  the  total  number  of  claims  to  water  from  Fresno  River  and  its  branches, 
namely,  50,  21  are  indefinite,  as  before  described  in  the  case  of  San  Joaquin  River, 
and  for  similar  reasons. 

Of  the  15  claims  to  water  from  Chowcnilla  Creek,  3  are  very  defective,  2  being 
practically  unrecognizable  as  to  locality. 

Besides  those  just  mentioned,  there  were  locations  on  11  streams  or  lakes  which 
I  found- impossible  to  identify.  The  claims  amounted  to  152,750  miner's  inches, 
besides  two  quantities  not  given,  and  one  claim  to  ''  all  the  water  of  Kelloggs  Creek." 
After  diligent  and  long-continued  search  in  every  quarter  holding  out  any  promise 
of  information — and  how  careful  that  search  was  has  already  been  indicated  in 
describing  our  methods — the  identification  of  these  claims  and  streams  was  of  neces- 
sity abandoned. 

All  the  canal  and  irrigation  companies  taking  water  from  San  Joaquin  River, 
Fresno  River,  or  Chowchilla  Creek,  with  probably  the  exception  of  the  San  Joaquin 
and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  claim  vested  riparian  rights.  Also, 
numerous  individuals,  riparian  to  one  or  more  of  these  streams,  make  similar  claims. 
None  of  these,  so  far  as  the  writer  could  ascertain,  has  been  adjudicated;  and  in 
consequence  it  is  practically  impossible  to  state  their  exact  amount. 

The  following  table  sums  up  the  claims  on  San  Joaquin  River  and  its  tributaries 
so  far  as  they  are  for  definite  amounts: 

Definite  claims  to  water  from  San  Joaquin  Rirer  and  trilrutaries. 


Name  of  stream. 

Number 
ofclaims. 

""Amount 
claimed. 

Name  of  stream. 

Number 
ofclaims. 

Amount 
claimed. 

70 

Incites. 
28,  244,  420 

1 

Incttfx. 
12 

North  Fork 

67 

4  '432  70(1 

3 

3  300 

Little  North  Fork  

0 

41,000 

slick  Roek  Creek 

1 

500 

First  North  Fork 

.1 

18  000 

1 

1  000 

South  Fork  .                                    .  .. 

4 

13,982 

1 

1  000 

12 

°,  550,  400 

Mill  Creek 

1 

4  000 

12 

83,700 

First  Clipper  Mill  Creek     

2 

6  500 

Fine  Gold  Gulch 

12 

38,800 

Second  Clipper  Mill  Creek 

1 

5  000 

1 

3,650 

Kings  Creek  

1 

1,000 

Whisky  Greek 

20 

10,900 

1 

100 

Sand  Creek  fprohablv  more  than  one) 

9 

15,000 

Bear  Creek  

1 

800 

Big  Creek                                         

9 

252,  775 

1 

300 

2 

360 

Roek  Creek 

1 

400 

16 

17,700 

1 

200 

Little  Dry  Creek 

1 

1  500 

1 

100 

7 

159,440 

Fresno  River  and  tributaries  

41 

649,  576 

Pitman  Creek  

3 

12,500 

Winchell  Gulch  

1 

1,000 

NOTE. — It  was  found  impossible  to  make  exact  groupings  of  streams,  but  those  given  are  approximately  correct. 


234  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

EVOLUTION  OF  WATER  LAWS  IN  CALIFORNIA. 

As  stated  before,  the  history  of  irrigation  in  California  began,  from  a  legal  stand- 
point, with  the  coming  of  the  gold  seekers  in  1848.  Previous  to  that  time  the  mis- 
sion fathers  had  cultivated  their  vineyards  and  orchards,  using  aqueducts  and  small 
systems  of  artificial  irrigation  modeled  on  the  method  of  Mexico  and  Spain;  but  very 
little  water  had  actually  been  used  and  no  occasion  for  dispute  or  necessity  for  local 
laws  had  arisen. 

But  with  the  coming  of  the  miners  and  the  location  of  their  mining  claims  water 
for  their  working  became  an  imperative  necessity,  and  often  the  water  acquired  had 
to  be  conveyed  by  means  of  ditches  and  flumes.  The  necessity  for  laws  to  regulate 
these  appropriations  of  water  was  evident.  Each  locality  adopted  its  own  simple 
rules,  based  on  common  sense  and  justice,  and,  as  before  stated,  those  of  the  differ- 
ent mining  districts,  however  widely  separated,  were  practically  identical.  The 
lands  being  a  part  of  the  public  domain  of  the  United  States,  the  first  appropriator 
was  held  to  have,  within  certain  well-defined  limits,  a  better  right  than  others  to  the 
claim  he  had  taken  up,  and  this  rule  was  also  applied  to  the  water  necessary  to  the 
working  of  the  claim.  The  first  appropriator  of  water  to  be  conveyed  to  a  locality 
for  mining  or  other  beneficial  purposes  was  recognized  as  having,  to  the  extent  of 
actual  use,  the  better  right.  The  doctrine  of  the  common  law  respecting  the  rights 
of  riparian  owners  was  not  considered  applicable,  or,  at  most,  only  in  a  very  slight 
degree,  to  the  conditions  of  miners. 

In  1851  the  State  legislature  of  California  enacted  a  law  sanctioning  the  "mining 
customs"  when  not  in  conflict  with  the  constitution  and  laws  of  the  State.  This 
enactment  was  based  upon  a  new  principle  governing  the  rights  to  water  in  the 
United  States,  the  principle  of  priority  of  appropriation  or  of  the  first  appropriator 
being  first  in  right. 

But  in  1850  the  legislature  had  adopted  the  common  law  of  England  when  not  in 
conflict  with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  or  the  constitution  of  California. 
Thus  there  were  established  in  the  State  two  distinct  systems  or  rules  of  law  govern- 
ing the  use  of  water,  one  having  its  foundation  in  the  equal  right  of  all  riparian 
owners  to  the  flow  of  the  stream,  without  material  diminution  in  quantity  or  altera- 
tion in  quality,  regardless  of  any  priority,  and  the  other  having  for  its  basis  the  law 
of  priority  of  appropriation  and  use,  without  any  ownership  of  the  soil  being  nec- 
essary, and  without  any  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  owners  to  turn  the  water  thus 
diverted  back  into  the  natural  course  of  the  stream. 

The  law  of  riparian  rights,  brought  over  from  England,  a  nonirrigating  country, 
and  embodied  in  our  common  law,  has  been  greatly  modified  in  its  application.  The 
right  of  the  riparian  owner  to  have  the  waters  of  the  stream  flow  past  his  lands 
"unpolluted  and  undiminished  in  volume"  has  been  enci'oached  upon  by  the  necessity 
of  other  riparian  owners  to  use  water  for  irrigation;  and  the  question,  Shall  irrigation 
be  considered  an  artificial  or  a  natural  use  of  water  ?  has  been  answered  by  the  courts. 
The  courts  hold  that  the  circumstances  of  the  case  should  decide  the  question.  In  a 
country  where  irrigation  is  a  necessity,  as  in  California,  irrigation  is  a  natural  and 
reasonable  use  of  water;  and  riparian  owners  are  entitled  to  use  the  waters  flowing 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  235 

past  their  lands  for  that  purpose  within  reasonable  limits.  Rights  acquired  under 
the  civil,  Spanish,  and  Mexican  laws  before  California  was  transferred  to'  the  United 
States  were  also  by  treaty  and  statute  fully  protected. 

STATUTORY  LAWS  RELATING  TO  WATER  RIGHTS. 

On  the  1st  of  January,  1873,  the  civil  code  of  California  went  into  effect.  Among 
its  provisions  are  the  following  for  the  acquisition  of  water  rights: 

SEC.  1410.  The  right  to  the  use  of  running  water  flowing  in  a  river  or  stream  or  down  a  canyon 
or  ravine  may  be  acquired  by  appropriation. 

SEC.  1411.  The  appropriation  must  be  for  some  useful  or  beneficial  purpose,  and  when  the 
appropriator  or  his  successor  in  interest  ceases  to  use  it  for  such  a  purpose  the  right  ceases. 

*        -  *  *  *  *  *  * 

SEC'.  1414.  As  between  appropriators  the  one  first  in  time  is  the  first  in  right. 

Si:c.  1415.  A  person  desiring  to  appropriate  water  must  post  a  notice  in  writing  in  a  conspicuous 
place  at  the  point  of  intended  diversion,  stating  therein: 

(1)  That  he  claims  the  water  there  flowing  to  the  extent  of  (giving  the  number)  inches,  measured 
under  a  four-inch  pressure. 

(2)  The  purpose  for  which  he  claims  it.  and  the  place  of  intended  use. 

\  (3)  The  means  by  which  he  intends  to  divert  it,  and  the  size  of  the  flume,  ditch,  pipe,  or  aqueduct 
in  which  he  intends  to  divert  it. 

A  copy  of  the  notice  must,  within  ten  days  after  it  is  posted,  be  recorded  in  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  posted. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  particular  form  of  notice  is  not  prescribed.  The 
courts  have  decided  that  the  notice  need  merely  be  sufficient  to  give  any  intelligent 
man  proper  warning,  and  its  language  must  be  liberally  construed. 

Due  diligence  in  diverting  the  water  and  completing  the  works  after  the  posting 
of  the  notice  is  required  by  law,  and  neglect  to  comply  with  this  regulation  brings 
forfeiture  as  against  a  subsequent  claimant  who  has  complied  with  the  law. 

RIGHTS  OF  RIPARIAN  PROPRIETORS. 

In  the  civil  code  it  was  provided,  by  section  1422,  that  "The  rights  of  riparian 
proprietors  are  not  affected  by  the  provisions  of  this  title."  This  section  was  repealed 
by  the  legislature  in  1887,  with  a  proviso.  Sections  1  and  2  of  the  repealing  act  read, 
in  part,  as  follows: 

SEC.  1.  Section  1422  (describing)  is  hereby  repealed;  provided  that  the  repeal  of  this  section  shall 
not  in  any  way  interfere  with  any  rights  already  vested. 

SEC.  2.  This  act  shall  take  effect  from  and  after  its  passage. 

Although  this  repealing  statute  seemed  to  be,  at  the  time  of  its  passage,  positive 
and  definite  in  its  intention  to  absolutely  abolish  the  riparian  law,  yet  it  has  been  held 
by  the  courts  to  in  no  wise  affect  the  riparian  rights  of  private  lands,  and  to  apply 
only  to  the  public  lands  and  their  waters  belonging  to  the  United  States. 

With  the  exception  of  the  act  repealing  the  law  of  riparian  rights,  the  statutory 
enactments  previously  given  simply  embody  the  princioles  and  practice  in  the  matter 
of  water  rights  previously  recognized  in  the  State. 


236  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

THE  WRIGHT  DISTRICT  LAW. 

In  1887  the  now  famous  "Wright  law,"  .so  called,  was  enacted.  It  was  entitled 
"An  act  to  provide  for  the  organization  and  government  of  irrigation  districts  and 
to  provide  for  the  acquisition  of  water  and  other  property,  and  for  the  distribution 
of  water  thereby  for  irrigation  purposes." 

Its  passage  grew  out  of  a  desire  to  end  the  interminable  litigation  arising  between 
the  appropriators  of  water  for  beneficial  purposes,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  riparian 
owners,  holding  rights  acquired  before  the  repeal  of  the  riparian  law,  as  before 
explained,  on  the  other.  This  litigation  had  threatened  the  life  of  irrigation  in  Cali- 
fornia, and  it  was  generally  felt  that  a  decisive  step  must  be,  taken  in  the  right 
direction. 

This  law  provides  for  and  authorizes  the  formation  of  public  corporations  called 
"irrigation  districts." 

Section  1  provides  that  50,  or  a  majority  of  the  holders  of  title  to  lands  suscepti- 
ble of  irrigation  from  a  common  source  and  by  the  same  system  of  works,  may  organ- 
ize an  irrigation  district  under  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

Section  2  provides  the  manner  in  which  the  district  shall  be  organized,  namely, 
by  petition  to  the  board  of  supervisors  and  the  filing  of  a  sufficient  bond  in  double 
the  amount  of  the  probable  cost  of  organizing  the  district.  The  board  of  supervisors 
may  exclude  from  the  proposed  district  any  lands  which  will  not  be  benefited  bv  its 
formation.  The  matter  shall  then  be  voted  on  by  the  people  at  an  election  held  for 
that  purpose  and  conducted  as  nearly  as  practicable  in  accordance  with  the  general 
laws  of  the  State.  A  two-thirds  vote  in  favor  of  the  formation  of  the  district  is 
necessary  to  authorize  it. 

Sections  3  to  11,  inclusive,  relate  to  the  election  of  officers  and  their  duties. 

Section  12  confers  authority  upon  the  board  of  directors  of  the  district  to  acquire — 

by  purchase  or  condemnation,  or  other  legal  means,  all  rights  and  water  rights  and  other  property 
necessary.  *  *  *  In  case  of  purchase,  the  bonds  of  the  district  hereinafter  provided  for  may  be 
used  at  their  par  value  in  payment,  and  in  case  of  condemnation  the  board  shall  proceed  in  the  name 
of  the  district  according  to  the  laws  of  the  State  provided  in  such  cases.  The  use  of  water  required  in 
any  irrigation  district,  together  with  the  right  of  way  for  canals  and  ditches,  sites  for  reservoirs,  and 
all  other  property  is  hereby  declared  to  be  a  public  use. 

Section  13  provides  that  the  legal  title  to  all  property  acquired  under  this  act 
shall  immediately  vest  in  such  irrigation  district,  and  shall  be  held  by  such  district 
in  trust. 

Section  15  provides  for  the  issuance  of  bonds  to  raise  money  for  construction, 
provides  for  special  elections  on  the  question,  for  the  method  of  payment  of  the  bonds, 
and  for  special  assessments  when  the  sale  of  the  bonds  fails  to  furnish  sufficient  money 
to  complete  the  work. 

Section  17  provides  that  the  bonds  and  their  interest  shall  be  paid  by  means  of 
an  annual  assessment  upon  the  real  property  of  the  district,  such  assessment  to  be  a 
preferred  lien. 

Section  34  provides  for  the  payment  and  redemption  of  the  bonds. 

Sections  35  and  36  provide  for  bids  for  the  construction  of  the  irrigation  works 
and  for  the  payment  of  said  work. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAyUIN    RIVER.  287 

Section  43  provides  for  the  apportionment  of  water  pro  rata  in  case  of  deficiency. 

Section  45  specially  provides  that  the  navigation  shall  not  be  impaired  by  the 
operation  of  this  act,  nor  shall  any  vested  rights  already  existing  in  water  used  for 
mining  purposes  be  disturbed. 

Section  4ti  provides  that  none  of  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  repeal  or  in  any 
wise  modify  the  provisions  of  any  other  act  relating  to  the  subject  of  irrigation  or 
water  commissioners;  nor  shall  any  private  property  be  taken  or  injured  without 
compensation. 

A  number  of  supplementary  acts  have  been  passed  since  the  enactment  of  the 
law,  modifying  or  strengthening  certain  portions  of  the  act. 

This  law  has  been  repeatedly  attacked  in  the  courts  of  the  State,  and  at  every 
assailable  point,  but  has,  without  exception,  been  held  to  be  constitutional  by  the 
supremo  court  of  the,  State.  It  has  also  been  carried  into  the  United  States  courts, 
and  although  declared  unconstitutional  in  a  decision  by.  United  States  Circuit  Judge 
E.  M.  Ross,  was  subsequently  upheld  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on 
the  points  involved. 

A  large  number  of  irrigation  districts  have  been  organized  in  the  State,  and 
many  of  them,  particularly  in  southern  California  and  in  Kern  and  Tulare  counties, 
have  been  successful;  but  others  have  been  at  least  financial  failures.  It  would  seem 
to  the  writer  that  the  lack  of  success  in  these  instances  was  not  due  to  defects  in  the 
law,  nor  to  the  difficult  engineering  problems  involved,  but  to  bad  financial  and 
executive  management.  In  some  instances  where  districts  have  been  organized  and 
bonds  issued,  interest  is  long  overdue  and  irrigation  works  have  not  been  as  yet  con- 
structed, of  at  least  completed.  The  farmers  in  the  district  are  assessed  when  no 
benefits  are  immediately  derived.  Default  in  payment  of  interest  and  expenses  has 
resulted,  and  the  financial  state  of  the  irrigation  districts  is  in  a  chaotic  condition. 
Such  outcome,  as  the  writer  believes,  is  much  to  be  regretted,  as,  with  skillful  man- 
agement, under  naturally  favorable  circumstances,  the  irrigation-district  system 
ought  always  to  be  successful.  It  involves  the  idea  of  local  self-government,  con- 
trol, and  taxation,  and  disposition  of  the  taxes  received,  and,  further,  retains  for  the 
use  and  benefit  of  the  farmers  in  the  immediate  locality  the  waters  which  otherwise 
might  be  diverted  to  remote  districts. 

LITIGATION   OVER  WATER   RIGHTS   ON   SAN   JOAQTIIN  AND  FRESNO  RIVERS 

AND  CHOWCHILLA  CREEK. 

IN  THE  SUPERIOR  COURT  OF  FRESNO  COUNTY. 

As  compared  with  other  rivers  in  the  State,  there  has  been  very  little  litigation 
growing  out  of  disputes  over  water  rights  in  these  rivers;  and  the  cases  that  have 
occurred  are  scattered  over  a  number  of  years.  In  many  of  the  cases  the  disputes 
arose  over  a  construction  of  the  rights  of  riparian  owners,  as  opposed  to  those  of 
appropriate rs.  No  adjudication  of  the  water  rights  of  any  of  the  canal  or  irrigation 
companies  taking  water  from  any  one  of  these  streams  has  been  had. 

The  first  case  of  any  interest  is  that  of  Wm.  Howard  et  al.  v.  John  G.  Stitt,  No. 
522,  Fresno  County.  The  complaint  recites  that  Fresno  River  flows  over  and  through 
a  certain  section,  township,  and  range;  and  that  for  many  years  previously  the 


238  IRRIGATION    INVKSTIGATIONS   IN   CALIFORNIA. 

grantor  of  plaintiffs  appropriated  for  irrigation  purposes  the  waters  of  said  river  to 
the  amount  of  17,800  inches,  and  that  said  water  has  since  been  used  to  irrigate  the 
lands  of  plaintiffs  and  others.  This  claim  is  based  on  prior  appropriation,  and  also 
on  riparian  rights.  The  specific  complaint  against  defendant  is  that  he  is  building  a 
canal  to  take  water  from  the  river  above  the  point  of  diversion  of  plaintiffs,  and  will 
thereby  reduce  or  entirely  cut  off  their  supply,  and  an  injunction  is  prayed  for. 
Although  this  action  was  begun  some  seventeen  years  ago,  subsequent  proceedings 
have  not  been  taken,  and  the  action  still  remains  in  the  lower  court. 

In  1889  an  action  was  brought  to  establish  the  validity  of  the  organization  of 
the  Madera  irrigation  district  and  of  its  bonds.  The  right  to  appropriate  water 
from  the  river  is  not  questioned — only  the  legality  of  the  district  organization.  The 
principal  opponents  of  the  district  were  riparian  owners,  such  as  Miller  &  Lux, 
George  D.  Bliss,  the  California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company,  the  Sierra  Vista 
Vineyard  Company,  and  others.  The  action  was  decided  by  the  local  court  in  favor 
of  the  district.  An  appeal  was  taken  to  the  supreme  court  of  the  State.  The  dis- 
trict, however,  while  the  matter  was  pending  in  the  supreme  court,  confessed  error, 
and  the  order  of  the  trial  court  was  thereupon  reversed. 

The  case  of  Chapin  v.  Albert  Brown  et  al.,  No.  4272,  brings  in  the  matter  of 
conflict  between  riparian  rights  and  rights  by  appropriation.  Plaintiff  averred  that 
Whisky  Creek  flowed  over  and  through  his  lands,  and  that  he  used  the  waters  of 
said  creek  for  irrigation  and  domestic  purposes.  This  complaint  clearly  set  up 
riparian  rights.  The  plaintiff  complained  that  defendants  intended  to  divert  the 
waters  of  said  creek  by  means  of  a  dam  to  be  built  above  plaintiff's  land,  by  reason 
of  which  plaintiff's  water  would  be  cut  off  or  reduced  greatly  in  amount,  and  he 
prayed  for  an  injunction.  Defendants  answered  that  they  also  owned  certain  lands 
bordering  on  said  stream,  and  moreover,  that  they  had  appropriated  certain  waters 
of  said  creek  pursuant  to  law,  and  had  prosecuted  diligently  the  construction  of  irri- 
gation works,  thus  making  their  claim  both  on  riparian  rights  and  appropriation  and 
use.  In  this  case  the  law  of  riparian  rights  was  upheld  by  the  trial  court.  The 
defendants  having  been  unable  to  show  that  the  water  they  proposed  to  divert  was 
to  be  used  on  riparian  lands,  judgment  was  entered  in  favor  of  the  plaintiff.  An 
appeal  was  taken  to  the  supreme  court,  which  reversed  the  judgment  and  remanded 
the  cause  for  a  new  trial.  The  remittitur  was  tiled  in  1894.  No  further  action  has 
been  taken  since  then.  This  case  is  a  good  illustration  of  the  conflict  arising 
between  existing  riparian  rights  and  rights  by  appropriation  and  use. 

The  case  of  Jesse  B.  Ross  v.  James  Lawson  (No.  4821),  brought  in  1894,  involved 
the  question  of  priority  of  right  by  appropriation.  Plaintiff  claimed  all  the  waters 
of  Sockanew  Creek  by  appropriation  and  use;  defendant  claimed  60  inches  of  said 
water  by  appropriation  and  use  for  five  years  before  the  commencement  of  the  suit. 
Judgment  was  rendered  for  the  defendant. 

In  1894  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  brought  a  suit  against  the  Fresno  Flume 
and  Irrigation  Company  (No.  8382),  praying  for  an  injunction  to  prevent  defendants 
from  diverting  the  waters  of  Mill  Creek  and  its  tributaries.  Plaintiff  averred  that  it 
owned  land  in  the  counties  of  Fresno  and  Madera,  aggregating  some  186,700  acres, 
situated  along  and  bordering  on  San  Joaquin  River,  and  certain  sloughs  adjacent 
thereto,  and  claimed  the  waters  of  said  streams  necessary  for  the  irrigation  and  cul- 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN   JOAQUIN    RIVER.  239 

tivation  of  said  lands  by  virtue  of  riparian  ownership  and  usage  for  twenty  years. 
They  stated  that  defendants  proposed  to  dam  Stevenson  Creek  and  Mill  Creek,  and  to 
divert  the  waters  of  said  streams  from  their  natural  channels,  thus  preventing  them 
from  flowing  into  San  Joaquin  River,  as  they  naturally  would  do,  at  a  point  above 
the  land  of  plaintiff.  This  suit  involved  questions  of  the  right  of  appropriators  to 
take  from  a  stream  flowing  past  riparian  lands,  by  interfering  with  any  tributary 
flowing  into  the  stream  above  the  land  of  the  riparian  owner.  Other  minor  questions 
were  also  involved.  The  case  has  not  come  to  trial,  the  defendants  having  as  yet  not 
filed  an  answer. 

In  March,  1899,  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  and  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings 
River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  filed  a  complaint  against  the  Enterprise  Canal 
and  Land  Company  et  al.  (No.  8630),  claiming  that  Miller  &  Lux  were  the  owners  of 
certain  tracts  of  land  bordering  on  San  Joaquin  River  and  its  branches,  and  that  they 
had  owned  said  lands  for  twenty  years  past,  and  that  said  lands  were  irrigated  and 
cultivated  by  means  of  the  waters  of  said  stream.  They  set  up,  then,  claim  as  riparian 
owners.  To  make  this  claim  more  decided  they  went  further,  and  stated  that  a  great 
part  of  these  lands  (being  in  fact  the  wild  grass  lands)  had  been  overflowed  yearly 
by  the  flood  waters  of  said  stream,  thus  being  rendered  exceedingly  fertile  without 
need  of  artificial  irrigation.  That  under  their  claim  and  right  as  riparian  owners  and 
appropriators,  plaintiffs  had  constructed  and  used  numerous  canals  and  branches 
leading  out  of  said  river.  The  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation 
Company  also  claimed  right  to  waters  taken  out  of  said  river  in  its  canal  system,  by 
appropriation  and  usage  for  twenty-five  years  past.  Plaintiffs  claimed  that  their 
canals  could  be  easily  supplied  only  by  water  from  San  Joaquin  River,  and  that  the 
lands  irrigated  thereby  could  be  irrigated  only  from  that  stream,  and  claimed  the 
right,  by  appropriation  and  usage,  to  take  from  said  stream  3,350  cubic  feet  per 
second  of  the  water  there  flowing,  and  claimed  that  defendants  had  no  right  to  take 
any  water  from  the  river  until  plaintiffs'  claim  had  been  satisfied.  Then  returning  to 
its  claim  as  a  riparian  owner,  to  have  certain  lands  overflowed  by  the  flood  waters  of 
the  stream,  plaintiffs  denied  the  right  of  defendants  to  diminish  the  flow  of  the  river 
by  the  diversion  of  water,  thus  preventing  this  flooding  which  was  beneficial  to 
plaintiffs'  lands,  and  which  occurred  yearly  if  the  stream  was  allowed  to  take  its 
natural  flow  of  water  past  and  over  plaintiffs'  lands.  Having  thus  set  up  their  rights, 
plaintiffs  stated  that  some  time  during  the  year  1898  the  defendant  Enterprise  Canal 
and  Land  Company,  constructed  a  large  canal  or  ditch  above  the  lands  of  plaintiffs 
for  the  purpose  of  taking  water  from  San  Joaquin  River,  and  known  as  the  Enter- 
prise Canal  and  Land  Company's  Canal,  and  that  in  March,  1899,  the  defendant 
actually  diverted  through  said  ditch  a  part  of  the  flow  of  San  Joaquin  River,  which 
water  rightfully  belonged  to  plaintiffs;  and,  further,  that  the  water  thus  taken  was  to 
be  used  in  the  irrigation  of  lands  not  riparian  to  San  Joaquin  River.  Plaintiffs 
prayed  for  an  injunction  staying  defendant  from  taking  said  water. 

In  answer  to  this  lengthy  complaint  the  defendant  Enterprise  Canal  and  Land 
Company,  except  through  a  general  denial  of  all  the  allegations  of  the  complaint,  did 
not  deny  the  riparian  rights  of  the  plaintiffs  to  a  reasonable  use  of  the  waters  of  San 
Joaquin  River,  but  principally  based  its  claim  upon  the  right  of  outside  parties  to 
appropriate  water  of  a  stream  not  covered  by  claims  of  other  companies  or  indi- 


240  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

viduals.  And  here  it  raised  a  question  of  fact,  denying  that  the  plaintiffs.  Miller  & 
Lux,  and  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  had  at 
any  times  diverted  or  used  3,000  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  from  said  river,  or 
any  amount  in  excess  of  480  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  and  denied  the  right  of 
plaintiffs  to  divert  more  than  480  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second;  and  further  alleged 
that  there  was  at  all  times  flowing  in  San  Joaquin  River  water  greatly  in  excess  of 
this  amount,  and  sufficient  to  enable  both  plaintiffs  and  defendant  to  take  out  all  the 
water  rightfully  belonging  to  them.  It  admitted  that  it  did  construct  said  ditch  or 
canal,  and  did  divert  water  through  it,  but  declared  that  it  had  a  right  to  do  so,  there 
being  in  the  river  water  in  excess  of  the  amount  rightfully  belonging  to  plaintiffs. 
Of  course  the  question  of  the  amount  of  water  rightfully  to  be  claimed  by  either 
party  was  largely  to  be  answered  by  evidence.  The  plaintiffs,  as  prior  appropriators, 
were  of  course  entitled  to  the  full  amount  of  water  they  had  claimed  and  actually 
used;  but  if  there  had  been  water  in  excess  of  this  amount  it  would  seem  that  a  later 
appropriator  would  have  the  right  to  take  that  excess.  But  there,  again,  the 
riparian  rights  of  the  plaintiffs  came  in  and  complicated  the  matter.  Would  the 
taking  out,  through  a  canal  above  the  lands  of  the  plaintiffs,  of  these  waters,  have 
so  diminished  the  stream  as  to  interfere  with  plaintiffs'  riparian  rights?  This  would 
also  seem  to  be  a  question  to  be  answered  by  the  evidence.  But  the  matter  of  the 
construction  of  the  law  came  in  on  their  claim  to  have  their  lands  flooded  yearly  by 
the  surplus  water  of  the  river,  without  interference  by  other  parties;  and  it  was  this 
claim  that  the  defendant  most  strongly  contested. 

It  further  asserted  that  plaintiffs,  as  canal  owners  and  irrigation  companies,  had 
no  right  to  engage  in  farming  and  cultivation  of  the  soil,  using  thereon  the  waters 
taken  from  the  San  Joaquin  through  their  canals.  It  further  averred  that  the  dam 
of  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  between  the  mouth 
of  San  Joaquin  River  and  Sycamore  Point  was  a  nuisance,  and  obstructed  navigation. 
Defendant  claimed  the  right  to  divert  500,000  cubic  inches  of  water,  measured  under 
a  4-inch  pressure,  and  also  to  receive  into  its  canal  or  ditch  all  the  overflow  water  of 
the  San  Joaquin  claimed  by  the  plaintiffs  as  riparian  to  their  lands.  As  will  be  seen, 
this  was  a  very  important  suit,  embracing  a  large  number  of  perplexing  questions; 
yet,  withdrawing  the  case  from  its  side  issues,  it  resolved  itself  into  a  conflict  between 
certain  riparian  proprietors  protesting  against  any  diminution  of  the  stream  on  which 
their  lands  were  situated,  and  claiming  also  as  appropriators  and  actual  users  of  the 
water,  and  another  appropriator  who  claimed  the  right  to  construct  a  canal  and 
take  water  from  the  stream  at  a  point  above  the  lands  of  the  riparian  owners,  said 
water  to  be  used  for  the  irrigation  and  reclamation  of  lands  which  probably  could  not 
be  otherwise  irrigated,  but  which  were  not  riparian  lands.  The  riparian  owners  and 
first  appropriators  claimed  that  their  necessities  and  rights  cover  the  normal  flow  of 
the  stream.  The  second  appropriators  claimed  that  they  did  not.  The  riparian 
owners  and  appropriators  claimed  that  the  overflowing  of  their  lands  by  the  flood 
waters  of  the  stream  was  a  part  of  their  riparian  rights.  The  second  appropriator 
claimed  his  right  to  divert  all  this  flood  water  into  his  ditch,  to  be  carried  on  to  certain 
other  lands,  there  to  be  used  for  irrigation.  Another  defendant  sued  herein,  Jeffer- 
son James,  set  up  a  similar  defense,  but  in  addition  claimed  riparian  rights  on 
Fresno  Slough,  a  natural  water  course  flowing  into  the  San  Joaquin.  A  complaint 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  241 

in  intervention  was  also  filed  by  one  Mowrey,  claiming  riparian  rights  on  the  San 
-loaquin,  through  Fresno  Slough  and  other  branches,  declaring  that  if  the  overflow 
waters  of  the  San  Joaquin  were  diverted  into  the  ditch  of  the  Enterprise  Canal  and 
Land  Company  his  lands  would  suffer  thereby,  through  not  being  annually  over- 
flowed; and  further,  that  any  diversion  of  water  from  the  San  Joaquin  by  defendant 
would  so  reduce  the  flow  of  the  river  as  to  deprive  intervenor  of  water  to  which  he 
was  entitled  for  the  irrigation  of  his  land.  This  very  important  suit  came  up  for 
trial  and  was  submitted  on  briefs  April  10,  1900.  The  court  rendered  its  decision 
August  1,  1900,  the  substance  of  which  is  as  follows: 

In  an  action  where  the  plaintiff  claims  that  his  rights  have  been  or  are  likely  to  be  invaded  by 
some  unlawful  act  on  the  part  of  defendants  it  is  first  necessary  for  the  plaintiff  to  show  that  he  has 
the  right  which  he  claims  to  have,  and  that  by  the  unlawful  act  of  the  defendant  he  has  been  or  is 
likely  to  be  deprived  of  those  rights.  The  evidence  shows  that  the  plaintiff,  the  San  Joaquin  and 
Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  has  been  diverting  water  from  San  Joaquin  River  by 
means  of  a  dam  thrown  across  the  river.  The  question,  then,  presented  is,  Can  anybody  ever  acquire 
any  right  to  divert  water  by  means  of  a  dam  or  otherwise  out  of  a  navigable  stream?  It  is  recognized 
as  a  fundamental  principle  that  no  one  has  the  right  to  do  anything  which  will  in  any  way  destroy 
the  navigability  of  any  stream.  It  is  my  opinion  that  said  company  has  not  acquired  any  right,  by 
prescription  or  otherwise,  to  divert  any  water  from  San  Joaquin  River,  and  that,  having  no  right,  it  can 
not  ask  the  court  to  prevent  some  one  else  from  interfering  with  that  which  it  never  possessed,  to  wit, 
the  right  to  divert  water  from  San  Joaquin  River.  It  is  contended  by  the  plaintiff  that  this  question 
can  not  be  raised  in  an  issue  between  private  parties.  It  is  not  an  issue  raised  between  the  parties  in 
this  action,  but  it  is  the  failure  of  proof  on  the  part  of  the  plaintiff,  said  company,  to  show  that  its 
rights  have  been  or  are  likely  to  be  invaded  by  defendant  in  this  action,  as  it  has  failed  to  show  that 
it  ever  had  the  right  to  appropriate  water  from  San  Joaquin  River.  The  act  of  the  plaintiff,  said 
company,  being  unlawful  from  its  inception,  it  can  not  found  a  right  on  an  unlawful  act,  and  I  am 
of  the  opinion  that  the  plaintiff,  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company, 
is  not  entitled  to  recover  in  this  action  for  any  acts  complained  of  on  the  part  of  defendants.  The 
plaintiff,  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  also  complains  of  the  defendant  in  this  action  for  diverting  and 
threatening  to  divert  the  water  from  San  Joaquin  River  at  a  point  above  its  lands,  which  it  claims  are 
riparian  to  said  river.  The  evidence  and  the  stipulation  of  the  parties  show  that  Miller  &  Lux  have 
large  bodies  of  land  which  are  riparian  to  said  river;  and  the  evidence  shows  that  the  defendants 
have  diverted  and  intend  to  divert  the  waters  of  said  river  at  a  point  above  said  land.  The  defendants 
claim  that  the  lands  of  James,  one  of  the  defendants,  are  riparian  to  the  said  river,  and  are  above  the 
lands  of  Miller  &  Lux,  and  that  the  defendants,  therefore,  have  the  right  to  divert  sufficient  water  to 
irrigate  their  riparian  lands.  The  evidence  shows  that  the  lands  claimed  to  be  riparian  lie  on  what  is 
known  as  Fresno  Slough,  which  is  claimed  by  defendants  to  be  a  part  of  the  San  Joaquin  River;  but 
the  evidence  shows  that  it  is  no  part  of  said  river;  that  it  is  a  channel  made  from  the  overflow  from 
Kings  River  during  the  flood  times,  and  that  none  of  the  lands  of  defendant  James  are  riparian  to 
the  San  Joaquin  River.  It  follows,  then,  that  the  contention  of  the  defendant  must  fail  on  that  point. 
The  evidence  in  this  case  is  insufficient  to  enable  me  to  say  at  what  stage  of  the  water  the  defendants 
may  divert  water  from  the  river  without  injury  to  Miller  &  Lux.  When  there  is  an  invasion  of  any 
right  the  presumption  of  law  is  that  a.n  injury  has  been  done,  and  it  devolves  upon  the  defendant  to 
show  that  by  the  acts  complained  of  plaintiff  has  not  suffered  and  will  not  surfer  any  injury.  In  this 
case  there  is  no  question  but  that  the  diversion  of  water  from  San  Joaquin  River  by  defendants  has 
done  injury,  and  it  follows  that  the  defendants  in  this  action  must  show  that  no  injury  can  accrue  to  the 
plaintiffs,  Miller  &  Lux,  or  to  the  intervenor,  J.  J.  Mowrey.  The  defendants  having  failed  to  establish 
that -fact,  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  Miller  &  Lux  are  entitled  to  a  judgment  of  a  perpetual  injunction 
against  the  defendants  in  this  case;  and  this  applies  also  to  the  intervenor,  Mowrey,  and  to  the  San 
Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  in  so  far  as  its  rights  as  a  riparian  owner  are 
in  this  action.  It  is  therefore  ordered  that  judgment  in  this  case  be  entered — 

(1)  That  the  plaintiff,  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  take 

23856 — No.  100—01 1« 


'242  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

nothing  by  its  action  in  so  far  as  its  claim  of  right  by  reason  of  diversion  of  water  from  San  Joaqnin 
River  is  concerned ;  and 

(2)  That  judgment  in  favor  of  Miller  &  Lux,  and   intervenor  Mowrey,  be  entered  against 
defendants,  enjoining  them  from  diverting  any  water  out  of  the  San  Joaquin  River;  and 

(3)  That  judgment  be  entered  in  favor  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation 
Company,  in  so  far  as  its  right  as  a  riparian  owner  in  this  action  is  concerned,  enjoining  each  and  all 
of  the  defendants  from  diverting  any  water  out  of  San  Joaquiu  River. 

(4)  That  each  party  pay  its  own  costs  incurred  herein. 

An  act  of  Congress  of  the  jrear  1890  makes  it  unlawful  to  build  any  darn  or  weir, 
or  any  other  structure  which  shall  interfere  with  navigation,  across  or  in  a  navigable 
river  unless  the  permission  of  the  Secretary  of  War  be  first  obtained.  The.  plaintiff 
in  this  case,  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  did 
construct  a  weir  across  San  Joaquin  River  just  below  Fresno  Slough  in  the  year  1898, 
and  although  this  weir  has  a  falling  section  at  one  end  designed  to  permit  the  passage 
of  vessels  up  and  down  stream,  still  the  company  failed  to  establish  to  the  satisfac- 
tion of  the  court  that  this  new  dam,  or  possibly  the  old  one  which  was  in  use  pre- 
viously and  which  also  had  a  falling  section,  was  not  an  interference  with  navigation 
and  a  public  nuisance.  The  point  made  by  Judge  Webb  in  this  connection  is  that  a 
right  and  a  claim  can  not  be  founded  on  a  wrong,  and  therefore  the  company  claiming 
the  right  to  divert  water  by  means  of  this  illegally  constructed  dam  had  no  right  to 
complain  of  injury  by  reason  of  diversion  of  defendants.  It  would  seem  that  the 
court  decided  that  no  one  has  the  right  to  divert  water  from  any  navigable  stream 
by  means  of  a  dam  or  weir  which  would  interfere  with  navigation.  This  point  in 
the  decision  covers  broad  ground.  The  riparian  rights  of  the  company,  and  also  of 
Miller  &  Lux,  were  apparently  sustained  and  protected.  The  course  is  still  left  open 
to  the  enjoined  defendants  to  bring  suit  against  the  company  and  Miller  &  Lux  to 
determine  the  extent  of  their  riparian  rights,  and  thereby  to  ascertain  if  sufficient 
water  is  not  left  in  the  river  for  the  filling  of  the  James  Canal. 

In  March,  1900,  Miller  &  Lux  and  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and 
Irrigation  Company  filed  a  complaint  against  Agnes  Borland,  setting  forth  grounds 
of  complaint  similar  to  those  in  the  last  suit  mentioned  (No.  8636),  except  that  the 
dam  and  a  pumping  plant  are  alleged  to  have  been  erected  on  Fresno  Slough,  a  tribu- 
tary of  the  San  Joaquin.  The  questions  involved  are  very  similar  to  those  in  the 
case  last  mentioned.  The  number  of  the  case  is  9004,  Fresno  County.  At  the  time 
of  submitting  this  report  the  defendant  had  not  answered  in  this  complaint. 

Case  No.  7969,  September,  1897,  William  Lowry  brought  suit  against  the  San 
Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  for  damages  to  a  crop  of 
grain  belonging  to  plaintiff,  caused,  as  alleged,  by  submerging  it  by  the  waters 
backed  up  by  defendants'  dam  across  the  San  Joaquin.  The  pleadings  do  not  dis- 
close any  questions  of  water  rights  or  irrigation,  but  in  the  trial  the  proofs  were 
largely  in  that  direction.  Judgment  was  rendered  for  plaintiff  for  $20,000  damages. 
An  appeal  was  taken  and  the  case  is  now  in  the  supreme  court. 

IN  THE  SUPERIOR  COURT  OF  MADERA  COUNTY. 

Madera  County  was  formed  from  a  portion  of  Fresno  County  in  1892,  and  con- 
sequently the  amount  of  litigation  growing  out  of  water  claims  on  the  San  Joaquin 
and  its  tributaries,  as  conducted  in  this  county,  is  comparatively  small. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  248 

An  important  case,  which  at  the  time  my  search  was  made  had  not  yet  been 
tried,  is  that  of  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  v.  Miller  &  Lux,  the  San 
Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  and  certain  individuals. 
Plaintiff  claimed  right  to  use  of  all  waters  flowing  in  Fresno  River,  and  in  certain 
branches  and  tributaries  the  waters  of  which  have  been  diverted  into  the  channel  of 
Fresno  River,  by  right  of  prior  appropriation  and  use,  said  appropriation  and  use 
dating  back  over  a  period  of  twenty  years.  Plaintiff  also  claims  riparian  rights  on 
Fresno  River.  Plaintiff  states  that  for  some  ten  years  last  past  it  has  concentrated 
said  waters  thus  claimed  at  a  point  in  the  bed  of  Fresno  River  above  a  certain  dry 
channel  or  waterway-  known  as  Cottonwood  Creek,  and  that  said  waters  have  been 
permitted  to  flow  past  said  dry  channel  and  on  down  to  the  lands  irrigated  by  plain- 
tiff, the  bed  of  Cottonwood  Creek  being  higher  than  that  of  Fresno  River.  The 
complaint  then  charges  defendants  with  lowering  the  bed  of  Cottonwood  Creek  and 
with  removing  plaintiff's  dam  therefrom,  in  order  to  divert  into  the  creek  a  certain 
portion  of  the  waters  of  Fresno  River  flowing  past  that  point.  The  complaint  prays 
for  an  injunction  preventing  this  diversion  on  the  part  of  the  defendants  and  also 
asks  to  be  adjudged  the  owner  of,  and  entitled  to  the  use  of,  all  the  waters  flowing 
in  the  bed  of  Fresno  River.  An  amendment  to  the  complaint  has  been  filed,  setting 
up  the  further  ground  that  Cottonwood  Creek  is  a  false  and  unnatural  water  course 
and  slough.  The  defendants  answer  that  Cottonwood  Creek  is  a  natural  water 
course,  and  further,  that  Miller  &  Lux  have  riparian  rights  thereon.  They  allege 
that  at  certain  times  of  the  year  (probably  during  floods)  a  certain  amount  of  water 
flows  from  Fresno  River  into  and  down  said  Cottonwood  Creek;  and  they  admit 
that  during  the  year  1899,  desiring  to  divert  a  certain  portion  of  the  waters  of 
said  creek  and  of  said  river  for  the  purpose  of  irrigation,  they  did  enter  upon  said 
creek,  and  did  propose  to  divert  said  water,  and  posted  a  notice  to  that  effect  at  the 
intersection  of  Fresno  River  and  Cottonwood  Creek,  claiming  25,000  miner's  inches; 
and  admit  that  they  did  commence  to  enlarge  and  improve  the  channel  of  Cotton- 
wood  Creek.  They  deny  that  they  intended  to  divert  any  water  from  Fresno  River 
which  plaintiff  has  any  right  to  use,  and  promise  that,  if  permitted  to  go  on  with 
their  work,  they  will  not  divert  any  water  to  which  plaintiff  is  entitled,  but  merely 
ask  permission  to  appropriate  water  in  excess  of  the  amount  rightfully  belonging  to 
plaintiff.  Miller  &  Lux  filed  a  cross  complaint  against  plaintiff,  claiming  right  of 
way  over  and  along  Cottonwood  Creek,  and  the  right  to  construct  a  canal  along  said 
right  of  way,  and  charge  that  subsequent  to  its  acquirement  the  plaintiff,  Madera 
Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  entered  upon  Cottonwood  Creek  and  constructed  a 
dam  therein,  thus  preventing  defendants,  Miller  &  Lux,  from  obtaining  any  water 
from  Fresno  River,  and  pray  that  plaintiff  be  enjoined  from  entering  on  said  right 
of  way  or  constructing  any  such  dam.  The  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company 
answered  the  cross  complaint,  reiterating  its  denial  that  Cottonwood  Creek  is  a 
natural  water  course,  and  declaring  that  the  dam  built  by  it  across  its  mouth  was 
made  only  in  order  to  restore  a  portion  of  its  works  which  had  been  destroyed  by 
defendants.  A  number  of  amendments  to  the  complaints  and  answers  have  since 
been  filed  by  each  side.  The  California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company  inter- 
vened in  this  suit,  and  claims  that  it  has  riparian  rjghts  along  the  lower  portion  of 
the  Fresno  River,  and  that  it  claims  the  natural  flow  of  the  river  in  that  locality  for 


244  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

irrigation  of  its  lands  and  the  watering  of  its  stock.  It  also  claims  that  this  diversion 
of  the  water  by  Miller  &  Lux  would  infringe  upon  its  right  and  prevent  this  irriga- 
tion and  watering  of  the  stock.  It  therefore  prays  for  an  injunction,  preventing 
Miller  &  Lux  from  making  such  diversion.  The  case  lias  not  as  yet  come  to  trial. 
Here,  as  may  be  seen,  all  parties  claim  riparian  rights,  and  rights  also  by  appropria- 
tion. The  question  at  issue  would  seem  to  be  whether  Miller  &  Lux,  by  enlarging 
and  lowering  the  channel  of  Cottonwood  Creek,  so  as  to  divert  a  greater  amount  of 
water  into  it  from  Fresno  Xiver,  would  so  reduce  the  flow  of  the  latter  stream  as  to 
encroach  upon  the  rights  of  plaintiff  and  intcrvenor,  as  riparian  owners,  and  upon 
the  former  as  prior  appropriately.  The  question  as  to  whether  or  not  Cottonwood 
Creek  is  a  natural  water  course  is  also  an  important  one. 

The  case  of  Goode  v.  The  San  Joaquin  Electric  Company,  where  damages  are 
claimed  by  plaintiff  by  reason  of  diversion  of  water  above  his  riparian  lands,  has 
been  tried,  decided  in  favor  of  plaintiff,  with  small  damages,  and  has  been  settled 
between  the  parties  without  appeal  to  the  supreme  court.  In  this  case  Goode  claimed 
that  the  defendant  company,  by  constructing  a  dam  to  impound  water  with  which  to 
generate  electricity,  had  shut  off  his  supply  from  the  stream  on  which  he  owned 
riparian  lands,  and  where  he  had  been  in  the  habit  of  watering  his  stock.  The  facts 
seemed  to  be  established  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  court,  and  small  damages  were 
awarded. 

The  case  of  the  California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company  v.  George  D. 
Bliss  et  al.  (No.  559)  came  up  in  189S.  Plaintiff  claimed  all  the  water  flowing  in 
Chowchilla  Creek,  both  as  riparian  owner  and  by  right  of  actual  use  for  ten  years 
past;  that  defendants  claimed  some  right  in  said  creek,  and  have  within  the  last  five 
years  built  a  dam  across  the  channel  thereof,  which  practically  diverts  all  the  water  of 
said  sti-eam,  except  in  times  of  flood;  and  that  he,  by  means  of  canals,  carries  said 
water  to  another  locality,  and  with  it  irrigates  land  distant  from  the  channel  of  said 
stream.  Plaintiff  prays  for  $10,000  damages,  and  also  to  be  adjudged  the  owner  of, 
and  entitled  to  the  use  of,  Chowchilla  Creek.  Defendant  George  D.  Bliss  answers 
that  Chowchilla  Creek  is  a  natural  channel  down  to  the  point  where  it  empties  into 
Ash  Slough,  and  that  even  in  times  of  freshet  a  large  portion  of  the  water  of  Chow- 
chilla Creek  flows  into  and  down  Ash  Slough,  and  that  the  only  water  which  flows 
down  the  bed  of  Chowchilla  Creek  below  that  point  is  either  superfluous  flood  water 
or  water  which  is  discharged  in  Chowchilla  Creek  by  artificial  means,  that  is,  the 
water  which  is  turned  back  into  the  Chowchitla  from  Ash  Slough  by  the  Sierra  Vista 
Vineyard  Company  for  the  purpose  of  irrigating  lands  owned  by  it  bordering  on 
the  Chowchilla.  Defendant  then  sets  up  a  claim  to  water  from  the  Chowchilla  as  a 
riparian  owner,  and  claims  that,  he  has  maintained  a  dam,  known  as  Montgomery  Dam, 
across  the  Chowchilla,  from  1878  to  1891,  for  the  purpose  of  diverting  water  for  the 
irrigation  of  his  lands,  and  has  turned  back  into  the  Chowchilla  all  water  not  absorbed 
in  his  process  of  irrigation.  He  states,  further,  that  ever  since  1878  defendant  and  his 
grantors  have  claimed  and  used  said  water,  adversely  to  plaintiff,  and  with  plaintiff's 
knowledge;  and  that  since  the  erection  of  a  dam  by  defendant,  in  1893,  said  defend- 
ant has  continued  to  divert  said  water  and  use  it  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  as  he  has 
a  right  to  do;  and,  further,  that  jf  all  the  water  of  the  stream  were  permitted  to  run 
past  this  dam  in  section  29  and  down  to  Montgomery  Dam,  so  called,  in  section  34, 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  245 

the  loss  by  evaporation,  etc.,  would  be  so  great  that,  after  the  proper  use  of  the  water 
by  defendant  for  irrigation,  no  water  would  be  left  to  pass  on  down  the  channel  of  the 
(Jhowchillu.  He  adds  that  during  times  of  freshets  there  is  abundance  of  water  flow- 
ing in  the  Chowchilla  throughout  its  entire  course,  and  prays  that  the  court  adjudge 
defendant  entitled  to  the  use  of  all  said  water  except  in  times  of  freshets,  and  that 
plaintiff  be  adjudged  entitled  to  no  water  from  said  stream  except  in  time  of  fresh- 
ets. This  is  a  case  of  dispute  between  two  riparian  owners  on  the  same  stream,  and 
is  a  question  as  to  how  much  of  the  waters  of  the  stream  the  first  owner  is  entitled  to 
divert  and  use.  Another  question  also  arises,  whether  his  construction  of  a  second 
dam.  further  up  the  stream,  tends  to  materially  diminish  the  flow  of  water  below  his 
lands.  This  case  illustrates  very  strongly  the  benefit  that  would  accrue  along  the 
Chowchilla  by  the  storing  and  proper  distribution  of  its  flood  waters. 

IN  THE   SUPERIOR   COURT  OF  MERCED   COUNTY. 

The  suit  of  J.  J.  Stevenson  v.  San  Joaquin  and  lungs  River  Canal  and  Irrigation 
Company  (No.  1767)  is  apparently  the  complaint  of  a  riparian  owner  and  canal  cor- 
poration, entitled  to  take  water  from  San  Joaquin  River  for  irrigation  purposes, 
against  another  appropriator  whose  lands,  plaintiff  claims,  are  not  riparian  to  the 
river.  The  defendant  has  erected  a  dam  across  the  San  Joaquin  above  the  land  of 
plaintiff,  has  diverted  water  thereby,  and  has  not  returned  it  to  said  river,  whereby 
plaintiff  claims  to  be  damaged  to  the  extent  of  110,000,  and  prays  for  an  injunction 
preventing  defendant  from  interfering  with  the  flow  of  said  stream.  Defendant 
denies  the  claim  of  plaintiff  to  the  use  of  the  water,  dating  back  to  1871,  and  claims 
prior  right  to  the  use  of  said  water,  and  also  declares  that  plaintiff  is  estopped  from 
bringing  action  by  section  318,  code  of  civil  procedure,  and  by  section  319,  Subdi- 
vision II,  and  section  338.  This  case  has  not  yet  come  to  trial. 

IN   THE   SUPERIOR   COURT   OF   MARIPOSA   COUNTY. 

In  the  year  1900  a  suit  was  brought  in  .the  superior  court  of  Mariposa  County 
by  John  R.  Kite  against  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company.  He  charges 
the  company  with  diverting  the  waters  of  Big  Creek  and  Raynor  Creek  so  that 
they  no  longer  empty  into  the  Merced  River,  on  certain  forks  of  which  Kite's  lands 
are  riparian.  He  states  that  prior  to  the  alleged  diversion  by  defendant  plain- 
tiff used  the  waters  of  the  South  Fork  of  Merced  River  for  power  and  irrigation; 
that  one  of  the  tributaries  of  said  South  Fork  of  Merced  River  is  a  stream  known  as 
Big  Creek,  and  that  one  of  the  tributaries  of  the  said  Big  Creek  is  a  stream  called 
Raynor  Creek.  That  defendant  has  a  dam  on  Big  Creek,  by  means  of  which  certain 
of  its  waters  are  diverted.  Plaintiff  avers  that  Raynor  Creek,  when  flowing  in  its 
natural  course,  empties  into  Big  Creek  at  a  point  below  this  diverting  dam;  but  that 
defendant  has  constructed  a  ditch  from  Raynor  Creek  to  a  point  in  Big  Creek  above 
its  diverting  dam,  thereby  taking  its  waters  and  preventing  their  flowing  in  their 
natural  course  down  to  the  lands  of  plaintiff;  and,  further,  that  defendant  has 
constructed  a  ditch  connecting  Big  Creek  with  Fresno  River,  and  now  divert  the 
waters  of  Big  Creek  into  said  river  instead  of  allowing  them  to  return  to  Merced 
River,  of  which  Big  Creek  is  a  natural  tributary,  and  on  the  South  Fork  of  which 
plaintiff's  lands  are  situated.  He  prays  for  damages,  and  that  defendant  be  made 


246  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

to  desist  from  such  diversion  of  water.  The  answer  to  this  complaint  states,  in 
effect,  that  plaintiff. abandoned  the  use  of  said  water  about  twenty  years  ago,  and  has, 
therefore,  lost  his  claim  thereto,  and,  further,  that  the  defendant  has  been  using 
continuously  said  water  during  the  past  fifteen  years.  This  is  a  conflict  between  a 
riparian  claimant  and  an  appropriate!'  and  diverter  of  water  from  its  natural  course, 
at  a  point  above  the  land  of  the  riparian  owner,  by  an  irrigation  company.  As  both 
parties  also  claim  certain  rights  by  appropriation  and  usage,  the  proof  will  neces- 
sarily have  to  go  toward  the  establishment  of  priority  of  claim  and  actual  use  of 
water,  as  well  as  toward  the  adjudication  of  the  riparian  right  of  the  owner.  The 
question  arises,  also,  Can  a  riparian  owner  forfeit  his  right  by  disuse? 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  majority  of  these  cases  are  still  in  court,  and  the 
questions  raised  still  undecided.  While  probably  other  cases  involving  similar 
questions  have  been  tried  and  decided  in  other  sections  of  the  State,  still  in  the  actual 
trial  of  each  individual  suit  many  new  points  arise  causing  it  to  differ  materially 
from  any  other  on  record.  It  would  be  extremely  difficult,  as  well  as  unwise,  to 
attempt  to  quote  decisions  already  given  in  cases  parallel  as  to  pleadings,  but  perhaps 
differing  in  essential  facts  from  these  still  unadjudicated  cases. 

INVESTIGATIONS  IN  THE  FIELD. 

My  field  work  consisted  in  inspecting  the  canal  systems  of  the  companies  now 
taking  their  water  from  San  Joaquin  River,  Fresno  River,  and  Chowchilla  Creek;  in 
surveying  and  mapping  the  streams  at  and  near  the  sites  of  the  headgates  of  the 
several  canals;  in  measuring  and  photographing  the  structures,  and  in  gaging  the 
flow  of  the  principal"  canals  (Pis.  XXI,  XXII,  XXIII). 

CANALS  ON  SAN  JOAftlTIN  RIVER. 

All  the  ditches  or  canals  taking  water  from  San  Joaquin  River  are  made  entirely 
in  cut  or  excavation,  no  tunnels  or  flumes  being  required  in  the  flat  river  bottom. 
The  headgates,  ditches,  stopgates,  and  weirs  generally  are  of  timber,  and  are  con- 
structed in  the  usual  form. 

UPPER   SAN   JOAQUIN    RIVER    CANAL    COMPANY. 

The  system  of  this  company  was  designed  to  irrigate  the  lands  of  the  higher 
plains  at  and  near  Herndon,  belonging  to  the  Bank  of  California  and  others,  as  well 
as  to  water  the  bottom  lands  of  the  river  between  its  high  banks  from  Hamptonville 
as  far  as  points  some  miles  below_Herndon.  Its  headgate  was  on  the  left  or  south- 
easterly bank  of  the  stream,  just  above  a  weir,  about  900  feet  long,  which  ran  entirely 
across  the  river  at  a  point  one-half  mile  below  Hamptonville  (now  Pollasky).  The 
canal  and  irrigation  scheme  was  a  complete  failure,  the  weir  being  repeatedly  broken 
down  in  spite  of  extensive  and  costly  repairs,  and  the  canal  cut  out  and  washed  away 
by  lateral  water  courses  or  through  gopher  or  squirrel  holes  in  the  side  hill  levees. 
In  1887  the  work  was  abandoned.  The  area  to  have  been  served  has  since  been  sup- 
plied with  water  brought  through  ditches  from  the  Kings  River. 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100.  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXI. 


RUINS  OF  WEIR  ACROSS  SAN  JOAQUIN  RIVER  BELOW  POLLASKV 


3gs&&&®&®&&  ™E  c^s^Xs^^s 


U.  S    Deot.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations,      lirigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXII. 


J 


U.  S.  Dep'.  of  Agr.,  Bui.   100,  Off.c.  of  Expt  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXIli. 


CANAL  SCENES. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  247 

THE    ALISO    CANAL. 

This  canal  belongs  to  Miller  &  Lux.  Its  water  is  used  exclusively  for  the 
irrigation  of  wild  grasses  on  lands  belonging  to  that  corporation.  It  has  no  dam  or 
headgate;  the  bottom  of  the  canal  at  its  head  was  made  lower  than  the  bed  of  the 
San  Joaquin,  so  that  no  dam  or  weir  is  necessary.  Construction  was  begun  in  1899, 
and  the  canal  is  not  yet  finished.  Tt  diverts  water  from  the  right  bank  of  the  river, 
in  sec.  17,  T.  13  S.,  R.  16  E.,  from  which  point  it  has  been  completed  for  a  distance 
of  6  miles.  It  serves  about  3,000  acres. 

THE   CHOWCHILLA   CANAL. 

This  canal  is  the  property  of  the  California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company 
and  Miller  &  Lux,  and  irrigates  their  lands,  principally  for  the  production  of  alfalfa, 
cereals,  and  wild  grasses,  and  for  the  pasturage  of  cattle.  It  heads  below  Aliso  Canal, 
in  sec.  30,  T.  13  S.,  K.  16  E.,  and  uses  Lone  Willow  Slough  for  the  first  3  miles  from 
the  river.  The  length  of  the  main  canal  is  about  24  miles,  with  14  miles  of  branches. 
The  maximum  capacity  of  the  main  canal  is  120  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  it  serves 
on  an  average  8,380  .acres  each  year.  The  canal  was  built  in  1872,  at  a  cost  of 
$120,000.  No  water  is  sold  from  this  canal.  It  is  in  use  throughout  the  _year, 
excepting  sometimes  in  August  and  September,  when  water  is  not  available.  This 
company  made  no  formal  appropriation  of  water,  but  holds  its  right  by  constant  use 
since  1872.  It  is  now  in  litigation  with  George  D.  Bliss  and  George  D.  Bliss,  jr. 
(See  PI.  XXIII.) 

THE    BLTTH   CANAL. 

This  canal  is  still  farther  down  the  river,  on  the  same  bank.  It  is  a  new 
construction,  made  in  1897.  It  has  no  dam  or  weir  for  diversion,  and  takes  water 
from  the  river  only  in  its  highest  stages.  It  is  used  exclusively  to  irrigate  wild  grass 
lands  on  Chowchilla  Ranch,  and  is  the  property  of  the  California  Pastoral  and 
Agricultural  Company.  It  carries  400  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  for  0.75  of  a 
mile,  and  discharges  it  into  the  dry  trough  of  the  Fresno,  where,  by  means  of  a  series 
of  six  strong  check  levees,  4  to  6  feet  high  and  1  mile  apart,  the  water  is  spread  over 
the  adjacent  plains.  About  9,000  acres  of  wild  grass  lands  thus  irrigated  furnish 
pasturage  for  large  herds  of  cattle.  The  cost  of  the  canal  was  $2,400,  and  that  of 
the  checks  and  levees  in  Fresno  River  was  $25,000. 

THE   EAST    SIDE   CANAL. 

This  canal  is  sometimes  called  the  Stevenson  &  Mitchell  Canal.  It  diverts  water 
from  San  Joaquin  River  in  sec.  16,  T.  9,  R.  12  E.,  about  14  miles  southwest  of  the 
town  of  Merced.  Water  is  diverted  by  means  of  a  temporary  brush  and  sand-bag 
dam.  Its  length  is  about  20  miles.  It  has  a  capacity  of  200  cubic  feet  per  second, 
and  irrigates  a  maximum  area  of  2,500  acres,  mostly  in  wild  grasses,  alfalfa,  and 
grains.  It  has  six  weirs  along  its  length  to  govern  the  flow  of  the  water,  and  also  36 
waste  gates  to  provide  for  the  passage  of  drainage  water  that  comes  down  the  gulches 
running  across  the  line  of  the  canal.  The  canal  was  built  in  1887-88,  at  a  cost  of 
$80,000.  A  suit  over  water  rights  between  this  company  and  the  San  Joaquin  and 


248  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  and  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  is  now 
pending  in  the  courts,  and  is  discussed  in  this  report  under  the  head  of  litigation 
(page  245). 

THE    JAMES   CANAL. 

The  James  Canal  Company  is  the  successor  to  the  Enterprise  Canal  and  Irriga- 
tion Company.  Their  canal  is  the  upper  one  on  the  left  or  southern  bank  of  San 
Joaquin  River,  now  in  operation,  and  carries  water  upon  the  flat  bottom  lands  of  the 
valley  in  the  region  between  San  Joaquin  River  and  Fresno  Slough  and  on  the  south 
of  the  latter  stream.  It  heads  in  San  Joaquin  River  about  14  miles  above  its  junction 
with  Fresno  Slough,  and. receives  water  only  during  high  stages  of  the  river.  The 
main  canal  is  29  miles  long  and  has  11  miles  of  branches.  It  carries  200  cubic  feet 
of  water  per  second,  and  has  served  a  maximum  area  of  42,650  acres  in  grain,  alfafa, 
and  grasses.  Construction  began  in  1888,  and  the  canal  is  not  3'et  completed.  The 
cost  has  been  $35,000.  (See  PI.  XXI.)  This  company  is  at  present  involved  in 
litigation  over  water  rights  with  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irriga- 
tion Company  and  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  under  the  name  of  the  Enterprise 
Canal  and  Land  Company,  and  is  enjoined  by  the  court  from  making  use  of  its  canal. 
This  litigation  has  already  been  discussed. 

THE  IRRIGATION  SYSTEM  OF  THE  SAN  JOAQUIN  AND  KINGS  RIVER  CANAL  AND  IRRIGATION 

COMPANY. 

This  is  the  largest  irrigation  system  on  the  river.  (PI.  XXII.)  It  takes  its 
water  from  that  stream  and  from  FresnoSSlough,  and  by  means  of  them  supplies  water 
to  the  other  canals  of  the  system  lower  down  the  valley,  namely,  the  Outside  Canal, 
the  Parallel  Canal,  and  the  Dos  Palos  Colony  Canal,  and  their  branches.  Just  below 
the  headgate  of  the  "Old  Canal"  a  fine  new  weir  of  the  latest  type  has  recently  been 
constructed.  On  its  southerly  end  is  a  gate  or  falling  dam,  which  can  be  lowered  flat 
on  the  bottom  of  the  stream,  thus  permitting  the  passage  of  boats  up  and  down  the 
river.  (PI.  XXI).  Some  such  arrangement  is  required,  as  the  stream  has  been  declared 
by  the  United  States  a  navigable  stream  far  above  this  point.  The  old,  or  main  canal, 
was  originally  constructed  with  the  idea  of  using  it  for  navigation  as  well  as  for  irri- 
gation, but  this  stream  was  afterwards  abandoned  on  the  ground  of  expense  of  con- 
struction and  operation.  The  main  canal,  built  in  1872,  heads  in  San  Joaquin  River 
at  its  junction  with  Fresno  Slough  (PI.  XXI),  and  follows  down  the  valley  on  the  west 
side  of  the  river,  for  a  distance  of  76  miles,  to  a  point  opposite  Westley,  in  Stanislaus 
Count}'.  The  canal  has  a  bottom  width  of  50  feet,  a  maximum  depth  of  6  feet,  and 
a  grade  of  1  foot  per  mile.  Its  estimated  capacity  is  900  cubic  feet  per  second. 
China  Slough  Canal  diverts  water  from  Fresno  Slough  about  1.5  miles  above  the  head 
of  the  main  canal  (PI.  XXI),  and  empties  into  the  main  canal  near  its  head.  This  canal 
has  about  the  same  dimensions  as  the  main  canal.  It  was  constructed  in  1897-98. 
Outside  Canal  takes  water  from  the  main  canal  on  the  west  side  about  2.5  miles 
below  its  head,  and  practically  parallels  the  main  canal,  at  a  distance  of  about  1  mile, 
for  37  miles  down  the  valley,  to  Los  Banos  Creek.  It  was  constructed  in  1896-97. 
Its  bottom  width  is  50  feet,  its  depth  5  feet,  and  its  grade  1  foot  to  3  miles.  The 
capacity  is  350  cubic  feet  per  second.  Parallel  Canal  is  taken  out  of  the  east  bank 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  249 

of  the  main  canal  11  miles  below  its  head  and  about  4  miles  below  Firebaugh.  It 
follows  the  line  of  the  main  canal  on  the  east  side  for  a  distance  of  27.5  miles.  It  is 
.'!.">  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  4  feet  deep,  and  has  the  same  grade  as  the  main  canal— 
1  foot  per  mile.  Dos  Palos  Colony  Canal,  built  in  1878,  takes  water  from  the  main 
canal  on  the  east  side  2  miles  below  the  head  of  Parallel  Canal.  It  is  11.04  miles 
long,  has  a  bottom  width  of  40  feet,  depth  5  feet,  and  runs  on  a  grade  of  1  foot  per 
mile.  It  carries  790  cubic  feet  per  second.  Its  water  is  distributed  through  four 
branches,  20,  16,  16,  and  10  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  respectively,  and  each  having  a 
depth  of  4  feet.  The  cost  of  the  canal  and  its  branches  was  $26,500.  The  canals  of 
the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  are  used  for  the 
irrigation  of  grain,  alfalfa,  and  wild  grasses.  The  cost  of  the  entire  system  of  canals 
and  branches  was  $1,167,805.  The  company  owns  no  lands  other  than  its  right  of 
way,  and  sells  its  water  to  the  farmers  along  the  valley,  and  principally  to  Miller  & 
Lux,  who  own  the  controlling  interest  in  the  company. 

In  direct  connection  with  the  system  Miller  &  Lux  use  Poso  Slough,  Temple 
Slough,  and  Santa  Rita  Canal  as  means  to  take  water  from  San  Joaquin  River  to 
irrigate  their  own  ranches  and  pasture  lands  in  the  "delta  district"  below  the  old 
canal,  some  15  miles  below  its  head. 

This  company  and  Miller  &  Lux  have  had,  during  the  past  few  years,  consid- 
erable litigation  over  water  rights  on  San  Joaquin  River  and  over  riparian  rights  as 
against  rights  by  appropriation. 

This  completes  the  list  of  canals  inspected  by  the  writer  which  take  water  from 
the  San  Joaquin. 

Recently  Fresno  and  other  cities  of  the  upper  valley  have  advocated  the  con- 
struction of  a  ship  canal  to  follow  in  a  general  way  the  line  of  the  river,  Fresno 
Slough,  and  the  lowest  line  of  the  valley,  past  Fresno,  toward  Bakersfield.  It  is 
said  that  the  large  canal  companies  have  offered  to  cooperate  in  forwarding  this 
scheme.  Of  course  the  United  States  Government  would  have  a  controlling  voice 
in  this  matter  as  far  as  any  interference  with  the  navigability  of  the  San  Joaquin  is 
concerned  or  affected.  Nothing  definite  has  as  yet  resulted  from  this  proposition. 

CANALS  ON  FRESNO  RIVER. 

There  is  but  one  S3Tstem  of  canals  deriving  its  water  from  Fresno  River,  namely, 
that  owned  by  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company.  On  this  line,  running 
through  hilly  and  rocky  country  for  a  portion  of  its  length,  there  are  numerous  rock 
cuttings  and  many  flumes.  The  canal  is  usually  "in  cut"  or  excavation,  and  its 
structures  are  of  the  ordinary  type.  The  company  makes  use  of  the  bed  of  the  river 
for  a  considerable  distance  as  its  main  channel.  The  company  irrigates  the  Adobe 
Ranch,  about  10  miles  easterly  from  the  town  of  Madera,  and  some  10,000  or  15,000 
acres  of  land  in  and  near  the  Howard  &  Wilson  Colony,  southerly  from  the  same 
town.  The  canal  was  built  in  1873-74,  at  a  cost  which  has  been  capitalized  at  $400,000. 
(See  PI.  XXIII.) 

This  company  is  in  litigation  over  water  rights  with  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings 
River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  and  Miller  &  Lux,  a  corporation,  and  also  with 
John  H.  Hite,  of  Mariposa  County.  These  cases  are  discussed  under  the  head  of 
litigation. 


250  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

CANALS  ON  CHOWCHILLA  CREEK. 
THE    SIERRA   VISTA   VINEYARD    COMPANY. 

This  company  makes  use  of  the  bed  of  Chowchilla  Creek,  in  the  vicinity  of 
JMinturn,  on  the  Southern  Pacific  Railroad,  as  a  storage  reservoir,  by  means  of 
a  dam  built  across  the  stream  from  bank  to  bank,  and  draws  water  from  above  it 
into  the  canals  on  either  side  of  the  creek.  These  irrigate  orchards,  vineyards,  and 
alfalfa  lands  belonging  to  the  company. 

BLISS   CANAL. 

In  a  similar  manner,  lower  down  on  the  Chowchilla,  George  D.  Bliss  and  George 
D.  Bliss,  jr.,  use  two  dams  in  the  bed  of  that  stream  to  fill  small  canals  and  irrigate 
several  thousand  acres  of  their  ranch  in  that  vicinity.  They  are  engaged  in  litigation 
with  the  California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company  over  riparian  rights  on 
Chowchilla  Creek.  This  case  is  discussed  under  the  head  of  litigation. 

DISTRIBUTION  OF  WATER  AMONG  CANALS. 

The  waters  of  San  Joaquin  River  are  divided  among  the  several  canals,  not  by 
mutual  agreement  among  the  owners  or  by  direction  and  control  of  any  board  having 
authority  or  any  State  official,  but  simply  by  being  taken  under  the  law  prescribing 
the  manner  and  method  of  appropriating  waters  for  irrigation  or  other  useful 
purposes. 

No  report  of  the  progress  of  the  proposed  works  nor  of  their  completion  is  made 
or  required  subsequent  to  the  time  of  recording  the  appropriation,  nor  of  use  of  the 
water  claimed  at  any  time.  The  facts  in  the  case  must  be  ascertained,  if  at  all,  by 
private  investigation.  The  difficulty  of  obtaining  such  information  can  not  be 
appreciated  except  by  one  having  made  the  attempt.  This  data  is  readily  obtained 
from  canal  companies  in  actual  operation,  in  so  far  as  possessed  b\7  them,  but  is  out 
of  sight  and  out  of  reach  in  the  many  cases  where  records  of  appropriation  have  been 
made  but  the  water  not  used. 

The  law  places  no  limit  upon  the  quantity  of  water  which  may  be  claimed  in  this 
manner.  The  statutes  prescribing  the  method  of  appropriation  lead  to  the  condition 
of  "  first  come,  first  served,"  but  this  is  tempered  by  the  necessity  of  actual  use  for 
some  beneficial  purpose  and  also  by  the  vested  rights  of  riparian  owners. 

The  Chowchilla  Canal,  owned  by  the  California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural 
Company,  has  made  no  filing,  but  claims  its  rights  by  virtue  of  use  since  1872.  The 
maximum  intake  of  the  Chowchilla  Canal  is  120  cubic  feet  per  second.  With  this 
exception  all  the  canals  and  companies  previously  described  base  their  claims  for 
water  from  the  streams  enumerated  upon  claims  filed,  and,  in  some  instances,  upon 
riparian  rights  also. 

No  record  of  appropriation  of  water  for  the  Aliso  Canal  has  been  discovered  by 
the  writer,  and  its  claim  is  probably  based  upon  the  riparian  rights  of  its  owners, 
Miller  &  Lux. 

The  Blyth  Canal  has  claimed  for  its  use  1,000  cubic  feet  (per  second?)  under 
a  4-inch  pressure.  Its  maximum  intake  is  400  cubic  feet  per  second. 

The  East  Side  Canal  Company  claims  345,000  miner's  inches  under  a  4-inch  press- 


IRRIGATION   FROM    SAN   JOAQUIK    RIVER.  251 

ure,  or  6,900  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  maximum  intake  of  the  canal,  claimed  for  it 
by  its  president,  is  :>00  cr'.ic  feet  per  second. 

The  James  Canal  Companjr  (formerly  known  as  the  Enterprise  Canal  and  Land 
Company)  claims  500,000  miner's  inches,  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  or  10,000  cubic 
feet  per  second.  The  maximum  now  claimed  for  this  canal  is  200  cubic  feet  per 
second. 

The  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  for  its  several 
canals  claims  from  San  Joaquin  River  and  Fresno  Slough,  near  the  junction  of  the 
two  streams,  an  aggregate  of  165,000  miner's  inches  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  or  3,300 
cubic  feet  per  second,  and,  in  addition  to  this  quantity,  "all  the  water  in  the  river" 
at  Firebaugh.  The  maximum  intake  claimed  for  their  canal  is  1,400  cubic  feet  per 
second.  In  addition  to  these  filings  Miller  &  Lux  claim  their  rights  as  riparian 
owners  to  an  amount  as  yet  indefinite  and  unadjudicated.  They  also  use  the  waste 
and  seepage  waters  from  these  canals  and  the  flood  waters  of  the  river  to  fill  Poso  and 
Temple  sloughs  and  Santa  Rita  Canal,  for  the  irrigation  of  their  own  ranches  in  that 
district,  and  to  flood  their  wild  grass  lands  adjacent  thereto.  The  maximum  intake 
of  all  these  canals,  with  the  exception  of  the  latter  group  belonging  to  Miller  &  Lux, 
amounts  to  2,460  cubic  feet  per  second,  so  that  we  see  that  on  this  river,  whose  mean 
delivery,  according  to  the  recorded  gagings  of  it,  is  2,448  cubic  feet  per  second,  we 
have  claims  made  by  the  owners  of  canals  now  in  operation  aggregating  21,320  cubic 
feet  per  second  plus  "all  the  water  in  the  river  at  Firebaugh"  plus  the  riparian 
rights  claimed  by  Miller  &  Lux  plus  the  flood  waters  claimed  for  their  ranches. 

We  see  from  this  comparison  that  the  mean  flow  of  the  river  has  apparently 
been  reached  by  the  actual  consumption  on  the  part  of  existing  canals,  and  that  the 
claims  to  water  by  the  companies  in  actual  operation  are  nearly  ten  times  the  amount 
of  the  mean  flow.  Evidently  the  irrigated  area  in  this  part  of  the  State  may  be 
extended  only  by  more  skillful  and  economical  use  of  the  waters  now  available,  and 
by  extensive  storage  in  the  seasons  of  flood  flow.  The  unfortunate  lack  in  this  State 
of  a  board  of  water  administration,  together  with  the  existing  loose  laws  relating  to 
appropriations,  naturally  leads  to  such  a  condition  of  affairs  as  that  above  described, 
and  to  over-recurring  litigation. 

The  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  is  the  only  one  taking  water  from 
the  Fresno.  According  to  the  records  of  Fresno  and  Madera  counties,  it  has  filed  on 
a  total  of  408,000  miner's  inches,  or  8,160  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  Of  this 
quantity  6,000  miner's  inches  are  claimed  from  Big  Creek  and  10,000  miner's  inches 
from  Raynor  Creek,  a  natural  tributary  of  Merced  River.  The  flow  of  the  river,  as 
has  been  shown,  at  its  greatest  mean  monthly  discharge  is  1,632  cubic  feet  per  second, 
so  that  the  amount  claimed  from  this  stream  and  its  tributaries  is  five  times  the 
greatest  mean  monthly  flow  and  nearly  forty-nine  times  its  annual  mean  flow  of  167 
cubic  feet  per  second.  The  company  claims  a  maximum  intake  for  its  canal  of  800 
cubic  feet  per  second. 

The  Sierra  Vista  Vineyard  Company  has  claimed,  by  "ecord,  from  the  waters  of 
Chowchilla  Creek  24,000  miner's  inches,  or  480  cubic  feet  ^  er  second. 

The  waters  claimed  by  George  D."  Bliss  and  George  D.  Bliss,  jr.,  for  their  dams 
and  canals  on  Chowchilla  Creek,  below  the  Sierra  Vista  Vineyard  Company,  are 
5,000  miner's  inches  plus  the  water  rights  of  their  predecessor,  J.  M.  Montgomery, 
a  record  of  whose  claims  the  writer  has  been  unable  to  discover. 


252  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

DISTRIBUTION   OF   WATER   AMONG   IRRIGATORS. 

In  no  one  of  the  systems  described  is  the  water  measured,  but.  when  sold,  is 
dealt  out  by  the  superintendent  of  the  eanal  in  amount  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  irri- 
gator,  who  is  charged  so  much  per  acre  irrigated.  Both  the  company  selling  the 
water  and  the  farmer  buying  it  admit  that  the  water  would  be  used  more  wisely  and 
economically  if  sold  by  measure,  but  each  party  to  the  contract  objects  to  the  measure- 
ment of  water — the  company  on  the  ground  that  the  measurement  would  take  too 
much  time  and  trouble,  and  the  irrigator  because  he  feels  that  he  would  not  be 
treated  as  liberally  as  at  present.  The  writer  does  not  doubt  that  the  sale  of  water 
by  measurement  would  lead  to  a  greatly  improved  system  of  conducting  the  water  to 
the  lands  and  applying  it  to  them,  as  well  as  to  much  more  skillful  and  economical 
use  of  it;  and  would,  undoubtedly,  greatly  increase  the  duty  of  water  in  this 
district. 

The  water  of  the  East  Side  Canal  is  almost  exclusively  used  upon  the  Stevenson 
and  Mitchell  lands  at  its  extremity.  A  small  quantity  is  sold  to  farmers  in  the 
vicinity.  Each  farmer  draws  off  the  quantity  that  he  believes  his  fields  need,  and 
pays  for  it  in  cash,  the  charge  being  $2  per  acre  irrigated,  or  $2.50  if  the  water  is 
not  contracted  for  before  the  1st  of  January.  The  canals  and  gates  are  under  the 
control  of  a  superintendent,  but  all  small  irrigating  ditches  must  be  constructed  by 
the  farmers  at  their  own  expense. 

The  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  sells  its  waters 
to  anyone  wishing  to  purchase  them.  The  public  water  rates  of  the  company  for  the 
year  of  1900  are  as  follows  for  any  part  or  all  the  season  between  July  1  and  the 
following  June  30:  For  alfalfa,  $2.50  per  acre;  for  cereals  and  corn,  $2  per  acre;  for 
orchards  and  vineyards,  $2.50  per  acre;  for  market  gardens,  $5  per  acre;  for  water 
supplied  between  July  1  and  September  1,  for  second  crops  of  any  kind  except 
alfalfa,  $1  per  acre.  Lower  rates  than  these  have  been  established  in  Stanislaus 
County  by  the  board  of  supervisors,  but  their  authority  in  this  respect  is  now  being 
contested  in  the  courts  by  the  company. 

The  irrigation  water  from  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation 
Company  is  supplied  upon  the  written  request  of  the  irrigator,  and  under  the  super- 
vision of  the  canal  superintendent;  and  is  sold  at  so  much  per  acre,  the  quantity 
supplied  being  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  irrigator. 

The  sale  of  water  by  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  is  conducted 
differently  from  that  of  the  others.  Water  rights  are  sold  to  subscribers  or  stock- 
holders at  $5  per  acre.  The  owners  of  these  rights  then  pay  $1  per  acre  per  year 
for  the  use  of  the  water.  Nonstockholders  pay  $1  per  acre  for  the  first  irrigation  of 
their  land,  and  $1.50  per  acre  for  each  subsequent  irrigation.  These  latter  rates  for 
nonstockholders  were  ordered  by  the  Madera  County  board  of  supervisors  in  1898. 
A  large  number  of  nonstockholders,  owning  about  6,000  acres  of  land,  take  water  at 
stockholders'  rates  as  before  stated,  by  virtue  of  the  purchase  originally  of  their  land 
with  water  as  an  appurtenance  thereto.  This  form  of  contract  just  described  for 
water  is  not  satisfactory,  either  to  holders  of  water  rights  or  to  ordinary  irrigators. 
The  former  complain  of  their  obligation  to  pay  $5  per  acre  for  each  acre  which  they 
at  first  contracted  to  irrigate,  whether  afterwards  they  wished  to  irrigate  it  or  not; 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  253 

and  also  that  the  nonstockholders  have  been  given  better  terms  than  they.  The  non- 
stockholders complain  of  a  continued  deficiency  in  the  water  supply. 

The  James  Canal  Company  leases  much  of  its  land  to  farmers  who  divide  the 
water  among  themselves,  according  to  their  needs,  and  pay  for  the  use  of  the  land 
and  water  with  one-fourth  of  the  crop  which  they  produce.  The  water  sold  is  not 
measured  in  any  way. 

The  form  of  contract  which  seems  most  satisfactory  to  irrigators  in  the  section 
of  the  State  visited  by  the  writer  is  the  one  which  stipulates  that,  upon  notice  being 
given  to  the  canal  company,  the  latter  will  furnish  the  required  amount  of  water 
upon  being  paid  therefor  at  so  much  per  acre.  Other  forms  of  contract  more 
stringent  in  their  exactions  on  the  part  of  the  canal  companies  are  decidedly  unpopu- 
lar, and  in  some  cases  have  the  effect  of  preventing  irrigation. 

METHODS  OF  IRRIGATING. 

The  lands  watered  by  means  of  the  canals  described  in  this  report  are  remarkably 
well  adapted  to  irrigation,  usually  being  quite  flat,  with  a  uniform  slope  of  6  to  10 
feet  to  the  mile  toward  the  bed  of  the  river.  From  the  main  canals  in  the  different 
systems  the  water  is  conducted  through  branches  and  laterals  to  small  irrigation 
ditches  upon  the  farm,  where  it  is  received  by  the  irrigators,  and  applied  to  the  lands 
under  their  direct  supervision. 

In  the  first  days  of  irrigation  in  this  region,  large,  high,  rectangular  check  levees 
were  used,  but  these  were  found  to  be  not  only  expensive  and  very  inconvenient  for 
the  passage  of  farm  vehicles  from  one  section  to  another,  but  also  to  require  much 
time  and  a  large  amount  of  water  to  fill  them.  More  recently  the  universal  practice 
is  to  use  low  contour  check  levees,  not  more  than  a  foot  to  eighteen  inches  in  height, 
and  from  10  to  20  feet  on  the  base,  enclosing  an  area  of  only  5  or  10  acres.  These 
tracts  are  quickly  and  easily  flooded.  The  levees  do  not  interfere  with  the  passage  of 
wagons  and  mowing  machines,  and  may  even  be  plowed  over  and  cultivated.  The  prac- 
tice is  to  introduce  the  water  upon  the  highest  level,  flood  the  area,  keep  the  water 
moving  along,  and  when  a  sufficient  quantity  in  a  check  has  been  absorbed,  to  pass 
the  remaining  water  on  to  the  next  and  lowei  check.  It  is  believed  to  be  the  best 
practice  to  keep  the  water  flowing  down  and  not  allow  it  to  stand  long  in  any  one 
area,  as  then  it  is  more  likely  to  bring  alkali  to  the  surface,  and  also  to  scald  the 
grain.  It  is  claimed  that  moving  the  water  tends  to  leach  the  alkali  from  the  soil. 

In  the  case  of  the  James  Canal,  the  method  of  irrigation  adopted  is  to  flood  with 
low  contour  checks,  and,  in  some  cases,  when  wetting  pasture  fields  and  wild  grasses, 
to  flood  without  the  use  of  checks.  The  lands  in  this  locality  have  a  slight  and  uniform 
slope. 

The  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Companj7  applies  water  by  the  same  method 
employed  in  the  cases  previously  mentioned — that  is,  by  means  of  low  contour  check 
levees  and  flooding  for  grain  and  alfalfa,  and  with  small  rectangular  checks  for 
orchards  and  vineyards,  with  occasionally  the  furrow  system  for  the  latter. 

The  Sierra  Vista  Vineyard  Company  applies  its  water  to  the  lands  by  flooding 
in  an  older  set  of  high  rectangular  check  levees,  and  also  in  a  later  set  of  low  small 
contour  checks,  this  latter  system  having  been  adopted  in  place  of  the  first,  upon 


254  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

extension  of  the  irrigation  area.     The  soil  is  a  light  sand}'  loam,  quite  fertile  and 
favorable  to  irrigation. 

In  cases  of  orchards  and  vineyards  planted  on  porous  soils,  lateral  absorption, 
or  furrow  irrigation,  is  often  practiced. 

DUTY  OF  WATER. 

Without  an  extended  study  of  the  results  of  irrigation  from  the  various  canals 
discussed  in  this  report,  it  would  be  impossible  to  give  an  adequate  treatment  of  the 
duty  of  water  in  the  district  covered.  However,  by  drawing  upon  the  experience  of 
irrigators  and  canal  owners,  I  was  enabled  to  ascertain  what  it  is  considered  to  be  in 
some  instances. 

The  best  accessible  authorities  give  the  duty  of  water  on  most  of  the  caiials 
under  consideration  to  be  approximately  160  acres  to  the  cubic  foot  per  second. 
This  would  apply  to  the  Aliso  Canal,  the  Chowchilla  Canal,  the  Blyth  canals,  and  the 
canals  owned  by  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company. 
On  the  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company's  canal  it  is  estimated  to  be  from  100 
to  120  acres  per  cubic  foot  per  second.  However,  the  loss  of  water  from  percolation 
into  the  bed  of  the  river  and  into  the  distributing  ditches  is  very  large,  estimated  to 
be  one-half  of  the  whole  amount  taken  in.  Of  course,  if  this  loss  could  be  prevented, 
the  duty  would  be  greatly  increased,  if  not  doubled.  The  largest  duty  found  was  on 
the  land  under  the  private  canal  of  the  Sierra  Vista  Vineyard  Company.  There  it 
was  roughly  estimated  by  the  proprietors  to  be  250  acres  per  cubic  foot  per  second. 

ANSWERS   TO  A  CIRCULAR   LETTER    OF   INQUIRY  CONCERNING   IRRIGATION 

MATTERS. 

During  the  progress  of  my  investigation  of  irrrigation  along  San  Joaquin 
River,  I  addressed  a  circular  letter  to  many  prominent  citizens  interested  in  irriga- 
tion, residents  of  Fresno,  Madera,  and  adjacent  territory,  and,  among  other  things, 
asked  certain  questions. 

To  these  questions  I  received  numerous  answers,  many  oral  and  some  written.  I 
will  endeavor  to  give  the  full  sense  of  these  replies: 

(1)  Is  the  present  method  of  adjudicating  water  rights  satisfactory?     If  not, 
what  method  should  replace  it?     It  was  generally  admitted  that  the  present  method 
of  adjudicating  water  rights  through  the  courts  is  very  unsatisfactory.     By  many,  a 
board  of  control,  or  a  commission,  with  full  power,  was  suggested. 

(2)  How  has  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  influenced  the  success  of  irrigation 
in  this  State?     And  do  you  suggest  any  modifications  of  this  doctrine?     The  unani- 
mous opinion  was  that  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  has  worked  great  hardship  to 
irrigation,  and  that  the  law  of  riparian  rights  should   be   ''entirely  wiped  out." 
Some  suggested  that  the  ownership  of  water  should  be  vested  in  the  State,  or  in  the 
National  Government. 

(3)  Is  the  present  system  of  stream  control,  or  lack  of  it,  and  of  dividing  the 
waters  among  the  several  claimants,  satisfactory?     If  not,  what  form  of  control 
should  be  substituted  for  the  present  one?     With  a  few  exceptions,  the  answer  was 
"No,  it  is  not  satisfactory,  but  very  unsatisfactory,"  and  a  system  of  control  similar 
to  that  in  the  State  of  Wyoming  was  several  times  suggested. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQDIN    RIVER.  255 

(-t)  Should  there  be  a  State  officer  to  bo  known  as  State  engineer;  and  if  so, 
what  should  he  his  powers  and  duties?  Opinions  seemed  to  be  divided  on  this  ques- 
tion; the  majority,  however,  were  in  favor  of  such  an  officer,  who  should  have 
power,  under  properly  established  principles  of  law,  to  adjudicate  water  rights. 

(5)  Should  there  be  a  central  office  of  record  for  claims  or  appropriations  of 
water,  instead  of  the  separate  county  records,  as  at  present?     This  question  was 
answered  almost  without  exception  in  the  affirmative;  the  county  records,  however, 
to  be  maintained  as  at  present,  and  to  bo  made  complete  as  to  the  identifications  of 
locality,  quantity  of  water  appropriated,  its  actual  use,  etc. 

(6)  What  supervision  or  control  should  be  exercised  over  water  rights  which  yet 
remain  to  be  acquired?     The  opinion  was  that  few  water  rights  now  remain  to  be 
acquired;  but  that  wherever  they  exist,  they  should  be  held  by  the  State. 

(7)  As  to  what  should  be  done  to  save  to  the  fullest  extent  and  to  use  the  most 
economically  and  efficiently  the  waters  at  present  running  to  waste,  and  particularly 
the  flood  waters,  .there  was  unanimous  opinion  that  it  is  absolutely  essential  to  the 
prosperity  of  the  State  that  the  waste  and  flood  waters  shall  be  saved  by  storage, 
and  dealt  out  under  proper  control  as  needed.     As  to  who  should  control  this  system 
of  the  conservation  of  water,  the  State  or  the  nation,  or  the  two  combined,  there 
seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  there  should  be  such  control,  but  some  favored  the  State, 
some  the  nation,  and  some  cooperative  control  by  both. 

(8)  What  legislation  is  needed  to  define  rights  to  water  and  to  stored  water,  and  to 
determine  the  ownership  of  the  waters  thus  stored?     By  whom  should  these  laws  be 
enacted,  by  the  State  or  by  the  national  legislature?     Many  citizens  seemed  to  have 
very  positive  ideas  with  regard  to  needed  legislation,  and  particularly  as  to  the  abo- 
lition of  all  riparian  laws,  saying,  "That  should  be  the  first  thing  done;"  but,  as  to 
the  course  and  form  of  further  legislation,  either  their  ideas  were  not  fully  matured 
or  else  they  declined  to  give  them.     Many  did  not  favor  national  legislation  on  this 

subject. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

As  a  result  of  my  investigation  and  study  of  irrigation  problems  existing  in 
California,  and  particularly  as  I  have  found  them  in  the  valley  of  San  Joaquin  River, 
1  have  drawn  the  following  conclusions: 

METHODS  OF  FILING  AND  RECORDING  CLAIMS  TO  WATER. 

The  present  method  of  posting  notices  and  recording  appropriations  of  water, 
under  the  existing  State  law  previously  referred  to,  is  unsatisfactory  to  the  last  degree; 
in  practice  it  results  in  great  indefiniteness  as  to  the  amount  of  water  claimed  and 
uncertainty  as  to  the  locality  mentioned.  It  countenances  ignorance  of  water  laws 
and  water  engineering,  leads  to  obscurity  of  title,  and,  in  many  instances,  renders 
the  establishment  of  the  validity  and  priority  of  claims  almost  impossible. 

If  the  present  method  of  making  appropriations  of  water  is  to  be  retained,  it 
should  be  reformed  so  that  every  record  of  appropriation  of  water  shall  be  perfectly 
definite  and  accurate  as  to  location,  quantity  of  water  claimed,  date  of  appropriation, 
size  and  character  of  proposed  diversion  works,  and  place  of  use  of  the  water.  Also, 
reports  of  the  time  of  beginning  of  the  construction  of  works,  of  their  progress  and 
of  their  completion,  should  be  exacted. 


256  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Periodical  reports  giving  an  account  of  the  use  of  the  water,  of  its  amount,  etc., 
should  be  required  to  be  filed  in  the  office  of  record,  so  that  any  person  may  at  any 
time  by  consulting  the  records  ascertain  any  essential  fact  relating  to  claim  and  use. 

ADJUDICATION  OF  WATER  RIGHTS. 

% 

The  present  method  of  adjudicating  water  rights  in  this  State  is  very  unsatisfac- 
tory. As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  only  adjudication  which  may  be  had  is  by  means  of 
a  suit  in  the  courts.  Nearly  every  decision  of  the  superior  court  is  appealed  to  the 
supreme  court  of  the  State,  and  several  years  time  must  elapse  before  a  final  and 
conclusive  decision  is  obtained,  and  thousands  of  dollars  must  be  expended.  Often 
no  new  principle  is  established  in  this  process,  simply  the  relative  rights  of  the 
contestants.  The  costs  of  such  litigation  have  often  been  enormous.  In  two  coun- 
ties alone  of  this  State  it  has  been  estimated  by  those  well  qualified  to  judge  that 
from  $1,000,000  to  $2,000,000  have  been  expended  in  litigation  over  rights  to  water. 
So  long  is  the  necessary  delay  in  the  overburdened  courts  and  so  heavy  the  legal 
expense  that  many  a  claimant  with  limited  means  is  debarred  from  maintaining  his 
rights,  and  is  forced  to  abandon  their  adjudication.  Wealthy  claimants,  by  pro- 
longing contests  and  multiplying  costs  are  sometimes  enabled  to  "beat  off"  those 
who  are  apparently  entitled  to  a  decision  in  their  favor. 

In  place  of  this  chaotic  condition  of  affairs,  the  writer  would  recommend  that  in 
so  far  as  the  constitution  of  the  State  will  permit,  legislation  should  be  had  to 
relieve  the  courts  of  this  great  burden  of  water  litigation  and  to  place  the  control  of 
the  streams  of  the  State  in  the  hands  of  an  administrative  board,  which  shall  have 
authority  to  adjudicate,  upon  well-established  principles  of  law,  all  water  claims. 
The  writer  deems  it  essential  that  the  decisions  of  this  board  of  control  shall  be 
final. 

INFLUENCE  OF  THE  DOCTRINE  OF  RIPARIAN  RIGHTS  ON  THE  SUCCESS  OF 

IRRIGATION. 

The  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  as  existing  in  this  State,  has  exerted  a  most 
injurious  influence  on  irrigation  affairs.  It  has  been  the  prolific  source  of  litigation; 
has  greatly  interfered  with  and  even  debarred  irrigation  enterprises.  The  laws  of 
the  State  of  California  clearly  recognize  the  right  to  appropriate  water  from  streams 
and  lakes,  as  is  shown  by  the  sections  of  the  statutes  previously  quoted.  And  in 
direct  opposition  of  interest  it  maintains,  under  the  common  law,  the  riparian  rights 
of  private  riparian  proprietors,  as  evidenced  l>y  many  consistent  decisions  of  its 
supreme  court. 

The  repeal  of  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights,  as  construed  by  this  court,  affects 
and  relates  only  to  the  streams  and  lakes  wholly  within  the  public  lands  of  the  United 
States  or  in  those  of  the  State.  The  riparian  rights  of  private  persons  owning  land 
on  the  banks  of  streams  remain  as  they  were  before  the  passage  of  the  repealing 
section  before  referred  to;  and  all  such  must  also,  in  the  future,  so  remain  during 
the  existence  of  our  present  laws  on  the  subject. 

It  seems  to  the  writer,  therefore,  that  the  riparian  doctrine  has  been  abolished  in 
this  State  in  so  far  as  it  can  be  until  all  the  water  shall  be  again  the  property  of  the 
State  or  of  the  General  Government,  and  that  waters  on  a  stream  can  be  appropriated 
for  use  in  irrigation  only  as  subject  to  the  riparian  rights,  if  at  all,  on  that  stream. 


IRRIGATION    FROM    SAN    JOAQUIN    RIVER.  257 

STREAM   CONTROL. 

In  reality  there  is  at  present  no  system  of  stream  control  in  the  State  of  Cali- 
fornia. Anyone  who  wishes  may  claim  all  the  water  of  a  stream  he  may  see  fit, 
and  may  proceed  to  take  out  as  much  as  he  likes  until  he  arouses  a  contest  with  some 
other  claimant,  when  immediately  his  case  goes  into  court,  to  remain  there  perhaps 
for  years.  It  can  hardly  be  denied  that  this  state  of  affairs  is  most  unsatisfactory. 
In  place  of  this  there  should  be  constituted  a  board  of  control,  of  the  highest  char- 
acter and  ability,  which  should  adjudicate  all  existing  claims  to  water,  and  have  the 
authority  to  carry  out  its  judgments.  All  water  not  covered  by  these  adjudications 
should  be  declared  to  belong  to  the  State,  and  should  be  controlled  and  divided  for 
use  by  this  board. 

STATE   ENGINEER. 

The  board  should  appoint  a  State  officer,  who  might  be  designated  as  State  engi- 
neer, of  the  highest  scientific  and  technical  ability,  whose  duty  should  consist  in 
carving  out  the  rulings  and  decisions  of  the  board  in  individual  cases,  such  as  decid- 
ing the  validity  of  particular  claims  to  water,  dividing  the  waters  of  streams  equably 
among  claimants,  etc. 

WHERE    CLAIMS   SHOULD   BE   RECORDED. 

If  the  records  of  appropriations  of  water,  under  the  law  therefor  and  as 
reformed  according  to  my  recommendation  previously  made,  should  be  maintained, 
there  should  be  not  only  the  record  in  the  office  of  the  county  recorder,  but  also  a 
duplicate  thereof  in  the  record  book  in  a  central  office,  as  for  example  that  of  the 
surveyor-general  or  the  State  engineer,  for  the  convenience  of  the  general  public. 
In  this  way  any  person,  as  for  instance  a  newcomer  in  the  State,  could  find  the  exact 
status  of  any  claim  to  water  on  any  stream.  The  convenience  of  such  duplicate 
record  is  obvious. 

Such  appropriations  of  water  and  all  unappropriated  waters  of  the  State  should 
be  under  the  exclusive  control  of  the  administrative  board  previously  mentioned. 
Progress  reports  of  the  initiation,  prosecution,  and  progress  of  diversion  works  should 
be  regularly  made,  both  to  the  county  and  central  offices,  and  annual  or  semiannual 
reports  of  the  use  of  the  water  so  diverted  should  be  required.  A  lapse  of  a  certain 
interval  should  automatically  work  the  forfeiture  of  the  claim.  The  before-mentioned 
board  of  control  should,  under  the  law,  have  the  supervision  and  government  in  all 
matters  of  water  rights. 

CONSERVATION  AND  TJSE  OF  FLOOD  WATERS,  AND  LEGISLATION  THEREON. 

For  the  same  reason  that  the  National  Government  takes  control  of  its  rivers  and 
harbors  and  expends  revenues  in  improving  them  for  the  purpose  of  facilitating  navi- 
gation and  commerce — that  is,  to  benefit  the  country  as  a  whole  and  all  its  citizens — 
should  it  assist  and  encourage  the  irrigation  of  all  arid  and  semiarid  public  lands 
within  our  borders,  thereby  affording  h6mes  to  our  ever-growing  population,  and 
increasing  the  wealth  and  prosperity  of  the  nation;  and  stimulating  the  basic  indus- 
tries agriculture  and  horticulture — the  most  important  in  every  country.  To  this  end 
it  should  preserve  from  sale  or  preemption  all  available  sites  for  dams  and  storage 

23856- -No.  100—01 17 


258  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

reservoirs  situated  upon  public  lands,  and  which  may  be  utilized  to  irrigate  .such 
lands.  As  far  as  practicable  the  flood  waters  of  the  streams  in  arid  or  semiarid 
regions  should  be  stored  and  used  for  irrigation.  In  this  connection,  ample  protec- 
tion should  be  extended  to  all  forests  at  the  heads  of  streams  that  they  may  forever 
remain  the  sources  of  perennial  flow,  equally  free  from  overwhelming  freshets  and 
seasons  of  drought. 

The  National  Government  should  also  introduce,  through  its  Agricultural  Depart- 
ment, the  most  advanced  and  improved  methods  of  irrigation,  leading  to  the  most 
skillful  use  of  water,  and  to  its  greatest  "duty, "and,  consequently,  to  the  maximum 
productiveness  of  the  soil  of  vast  previously  arid  regions. 

In  cooperation  with  the  National  Government,  the  State  should  adopt  a  simple 
and  effective  law  to  govern  the  administration  and  use  of  all  its  waters,  and  the 
adjudication  of  all  rights  thereto  acquired. 

The  common  law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  seems  to  sufficiently  protect  private 
riparian  owners  and  their  use  of  water  from  streams,  for  all  ordinary  purposes,  as 
for  domestic  use,  milling,  etc.,  with  the  exception  of  that  of  irrigation.  And  yet 
the  use  of  water  for  irrigation  in  the  arid  States  and  Territories  is  the  most  important 
of  all.  But  irrigation  is  unknown  to  common  law,  and  legislation  in  this  State  is 
needed  to  encourage  and  protect  that  great  and  important  use  of  water.  The  aim  in 
this  legislation  should  be,  therefore,  to  benefit  as  largely  as  possible  the  agricultural 
population,  without  injuring  the  private  rights  of  any  riparian  proprietors. 

The  fundamental  idea  in  such  legislation,  in  case  the  State  does  not  see  its  win- 
to  the  acquisition  of  all  existing  titles  to  its  waters,  is  in  the  writer's  opinion,  to 
determine  and  decide  authoritatively  what  quantity  of  water  each  riparian  owner 
and  irrigator  along  each  stream  is  justly  entitled  to  consume.  Apparently,  upon  an 
equitable  adjustment,  each  would  be  entitled  to  take  the  excess  of  water  left  over  the 
just  amounts  belonging  to  the  other  claimants. 

A  State  board  of  control,  having  a  State  engineer  of  its  own  appointment  for  its 
executive  officer,  should  make  such  equitable  adjustments,  considering  and  fairly 
treating  the  claims  of  irrigators,  and  respecting  the  natural  rights  of  riparian  and 
nonriparian  owners. 


WATER  APPROPRIATION  FROM  KINGS  RIVER. 

By  C.  E.  GRUNSKY,  C.  E., 
Otty  Engineer  of  San  Francisco. 

KINGS  RIVEE. 

There  is  probably  no  river  draining  the  western  slope  of  the  Sierra  Nevada 
whose  irrigation  svstem  is  more  worthy  of  careful  consideration  than  Kings  River. 
PI.  XXIV. 

Physical  conditions  are  favorable  for  the  diversion  of  the  river  water  upon  the 
great  eastern  plain  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley.  To  the  right  and  to  the  left  the  lands 
commanded  are  fertile  and  smooth  surfaced,  well  adapted  to  irrigation  and  of  great 
extent.  The  river  has  a  large  discharge,  particularly  in  the  months  when  water  is 
most  in  demand  for  irrigation.  The  early  settlers  on  the  banks  of  the  river  and  in 
the  river  delta  were  appreciative  of  the  advantages  resulting  from  the  use  of  water 
for  irrigation,  and  the  efforts  to  extend  the  irrigation  system  have  been  persistent 
and  more  than  ordinarily  successful. 

It  goes  without  saying  that  the  results  would  have  been  still  better  and  that 
much  less  litigation  relating  to  water  titles  would  now  be  pending  if  operations  could 
have  been  conducted  under  adequate  and  equitable  water  laws. 

Under  the  somewhat  doubtful  sanction  of  law,  and  in  direct  contravention  of 
the  riparian  doctrine,  as  sometimes  inteipreted,  water  has  heretofore  been  taken,  and 
and  is  being  taken,  for  use  in  irrigating  lands  not  riparian  by  anyone  in  need 
thereof,  or  in  a  position  to  take  advantage  of  opportunities,  for  the  supply  of  his 
own  needs  and  of  those  of  his  neighbors.  A  lamentable  absence  of  recorded  facts  in 
the  matter  of  the  claiming  and  the  taking  of  water  and  the  putting  of  the  same  to 
some  beneficial  use  not  only  renders  a  study  and  discussion  of  water  rights  and  water 
appropriations  difficult  and  almost  impossible  without  an  elaborate  and  extended 
inquiry  into  physical  facts  and  conditions,  but,  coupled  with  the  uncertainty  of  being 
able  or  permitted  to  acquire  any  permanent  rights  to  its  use  and  to  receive  adequate 
protection  therein,  has  discouraged  all  except  a  few  bold  and  favored  ones  from  put- 
ting forth  special  efforts  or  taking  any  considerable  financial  risks  looking  toward 
the  development  and  control  of  water  for  irrigating  purposes.  So  it  happens  that 
but  few  of  the  Kings  River  canals  are  managed  for  profit  from  the  sale  of  water. 
Most  of  them  are  owned  by  the  landowners. 

It  was  perhaps  fortunate  for  the  region  now  watered  by  Kings  River  that  the 
first  corners  thought  the  high  plains  of  the  valley  fit  for  general  agricultural  purposes, 
and  particularly  for  wheat  raising,  without  irrigation,  because  these  settlers,  com- 
paring their  crops  with  the  luxuriant  growth  upon  the  river  bottoms,  could  not 
but  appreciate  the  contrast,  due  mainly  to  the  presence  of  abundant  moisture.  And 

259 


260  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

when  crop  failure  after  crop  failure  made  financial  ruin  seem  certain,  there  remained 
nothing  to  do  but  to  risk  all  in  an  endeavor  to  get  water  out  upon  the  upland. 

So  it  came  about  that  many  were  soon  ready  to  make  desperate  efforts  to  coax  a 
portion  of  the  river's  abundant  supply  of  water  out  upon  the  high,  dry  plain,  for 
when  a  first  effort  had  met  with  success  and  apparently  justified  the  judgment  of  its 
promoters  others  quickly  followed,  and  this  despite  the  fact  that  under  some  inter- 
pretations of  the  riparian  doctrine  no  such  diversion  was  permissible,  unless,  possibly, 
for  riparian  lands,  without  the  consent  of  all  lower  riparian  owners.  Whenever  the 
settlers  were  financially  able  and  water  was  within  reach  of  their  means,  even  though 
the  means  consisted  not  of  coin,  but  only  of  plows,  scrapers,  and  willing  hands, 
ditches  and  canals  were  constructed.  It  was  thus  that  Mr.  M.  J.  Church,  the  pro- 
jector of  the  Fresno  Canal,  and  himself  the  owner  of  a  section  of  upland,  pledged  his 
whole  credit  to  promote  ditch  construction.  And  it  was  the  same  spirit  which  a  few 
\Tears  later  prompted  the  farmers  of  the  Kingsburg  region  to  pay  for  their  right  to 
take  water  from  the  Fresno  Canal  by  constructing  one  of  its  most  expensive  sections, 
contributing  labor,  horses,  implements,  and  supplies  at  a  time  when  they  were  hard 
pressed  in  obtaining  the  mere  necessities  of  life.  It  is  this  spirit  which  has  called 
into  being  the  extensive  irrigation  canal  and  ditch  systems  of  Kings  River,  which 
now  command  over  1,000  square  miles  of  valley  land,  and  actually  benefit  an  area  of 
about  70,000  acres. 

Kings  River  takes  rank  among  the  large  rivers  which  drain  the  western  slope 
of  the  Sierra  Nevada.  Only  one  of  these  has  a  larger  drainage  basin — Kern  River, 
with  2,345  square  miles — but  the  precipitation  on  the  watershed  of  Kern  River  being 
less  than  that  of  the  Kings  River  the  latter  outranks  the  former  when  volumes  of 
flow  are  compared.  San  Joaquin  and  Tuolumne  rivers  are  in  this  class,  with  drainage 
basins  but  little  smaller  than  that  of  Kings  River,  but  both  being  farther  north,  with 
somewhat  greater  rainfall.  In  location  Kings  River  maybe  classed  as  fairly  central; 
it  cuts  across  the  east-side  plain  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  to  the  Tulare  Lake  about 
midway  between  Stockton  and  the  southern  extremity  of  the  valley.  It  is  paralleled 
by  the  San  Joaquin  River  on  the  north,  about  20  miles  distant,  and  by  the  Keweah 
River  on  the  south,  about  15  miles  away.  The  breadth  of  the  east-side  valley -plain 
course  of  the  river  from  base  of  the  foothills  to  the  lake  and  swamp  region  is  about 
30  miles. 

The  elevation  of  the  valley  where  Kings  River  leaves  the  foothills  is  about  400 
feet  above  sea  level.  It  falls  in  20  miles  to  about  300  feet  at  Fresno,  and  about  86 
feet  thence  to  Summit  Lake,  which,  as  its  name  implies,  lies  on  the  delta  summit 
which  divides  the  Tulare  Lake  basin  from  the  Fresno  Swamp  region  to  the  north- 
ward. This  delta  summit  is  a  very  flat  ridge  built  across  the  valley  by  the  detrital 
matter  brought  down  by  Kings  River  waters:  At  its  lowest  points  in  the  trough 
of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  its  elevation  is  about  214  feet  above  sea  level,  and  about 
30  feet  higher  than  the  general  level  of  the  lowest  portions  of  the  Tulare  Lake  bed. 

WATERSHED. 

The  watershed  o£  Kings  River  has  an  area  of  1,742  square  miles.  It  is  fan- 
shaped  in  form,  spreading  out  as  it  extends  northwesterly  from  the  foothills  near 
Sanger  into  the  Sierra  Nevada,  of  whose  crest  line  the  river  drains  a  length  of  about 


U.S.OEPT.  OFAGR.  BUL.IOO    OFFICE   OF  EXPT.    STATIONS 


MAP    OF 

KING  SKIVER 

StTOWTN'G 

CANALS  DIVERTING 

AND   THE 

LOCATION  AND  AREA  OF 
LANDS  IRRIGATED 

THEREFROM 

CALIFORNIA. 


PLATE   XXIV 


LEGEND 

LAN  OS    IRRIGATED    BY 


Centreville    and   K.Cana 

Mussel    Sloujh    Canal 
a 

Peop  le's  Canal 
Crescent    Canal 
Turner  Ditch 
other  small   D  itches 


Fresno   and   K.  R.  Canal 

Fresno  Canal 

'76' Canal 

Last  Chance  .Canal 

James  Canal 

Mill  Race  Canals 

other   small   Canals 


Fowler  Switch    Canal 

Leinberger  Canal 

Liberty  Ca 

HiteDitch 

Burrell  Ditch 

other  small  Ditches 


County  Boundaries 

T.1SS. 

Contours  ••-•- ..- 


WATKR    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVKB.  2()1 

45  milos,  extending  from  Mount  Goddard  on  the  north  to  Mount  Silliman  and 
Mount  Brewer  on  the  south.  Much  of  this  drainage  basin  i.s  in  the  rugged,  bare, 
granite  region,  at  an  average  elevation  of  about  5,000  to  7,000  feet.  The  stream  and 
its  brandies  flow  in  deep,  rock}'  gorges  of  stupendous  grandeur,  and  the  perpetual 
snow  hangs  on  the  .shaded  slopes  of  the  highest  mountains,  some  of  which  rise  to 
heights  of  12,000  to  14,000  feet.  Very  little  of  the  river's  mountain  drainage  basin 
is  habitable:  probably  more  than  three-fourths  of  it  is  accessible  for  four  to  five 
months  only  each  year.  Precipitation  on  this  watershed  increases  from  the  base  of 
the  Sierra  Nevada  to  near  the  mountain  summit.  The  average  annual  fall  of  rain 
and  snow  for  the  drainage  basin  of  the  river  is  about  25  inches. 

VALLEY  SECTION  OF  KINGS  RIVER. 

To  some  extent  the  descriptions  of  Kings  River  and  its  canals,  which  in  compact 
form  are  essential  to  this  paper,  are  a  repetition  of  the  descriptions  published  in 
Water  Supply  Paper  No.  18  of  the  U.  S.  Geological  Survey,  to  which  reference  may 
be  had  for  some  additional  information  relating  to  canal  history,  to  methods  of  irri- 
gation, duty  of  water,  and  the  effect  of  irrigation  on  subsoil  waters. 

The  upper  sections  of  Kings  River  are  walled  in  by  high  mountains  and  by  the 
foothills  of  the  Sierra  Nevada,  which  open  out  somewhat  within  a  few  miles  of  the 
western  base  of  the  mountain  range.  Here  the  hills,  retreating  to  the  right  and  left, 
admit  patches  of  valley  land,  which  are  pleasantly  located  upon  both  sides  of  the 
river.  The  river  flows  on  a  coarse  cobble  bed  out  of  its  mountain  confine,  gradually 
dropping  below  the  general  valley  surface  so  that  at  what  might  be  considered  the 
eastern  edge  of  the  valley  plain  it  flows  through  bottom  lands  which  lie  from  10  to 
15  feet  lower  than  the  main  valley  floor.  These  bottom  lands  are  sharply  defined  or 
limited  by  bluffs,  which,  after  separating  to  a  greatest  width  of  about  4  miles,  almost 
unite  9  miles  below  the  upper  end  of  the  bottoms  at  the  so-called  "  Narrows." 

The  bottoms,  which  are  only  10  to  15  feet  below  the  general  surface  level  of  the 
main  valley  above  Centerville,  are  about  60  feet  lower  than  the  valley  surface  at  the 
Narrows.  They  have  an  area  of  about  26  square  miles.  The  height  of  the  bluffs 
below  the  Narrows,  now  close  to  the  river  banks,  gradually  decreases  toward  the 
west,  permitting  the  bluffs  to  gradually  merge  into  the  valley  surface  a  short 
distance  below  Kingsburg.  Westward  from  this  point  the  river  is  a  bank-building 
stream;  its  delta  commences  and  water  diversion  is  effected  with  ease. 

The  main  river  and  south-side  delta  channels  drop  naturally  on  easy  gradients 
into  Tulare  Lake;  the  north-side  delta  channels  discharge  into  Fresno  Swamp  to  the 
northward  of  Summit  Lake;  and  the  waters  flow  thence  northwesterly  through  the 
channels  and  depressions  of  this  swamp  along  the  valley  trough  to  a  junction  with 
the  San  Joaquin  River  at  Las  Juntas.  The  overflow  of  Tulare  Lake,,  when  there  is 
any,  takes  the  same  northwesterly  course  into  and  through  Fresno  Swamp. 

The  main  channel  of  the  river  from  the  foothills  to  its  outfall  into  Tulare  Lake 
has  a  length  of  from  70  to  80  miles,  according  to  the  stage  of  the  lake.  The  river 
through  the  Centerville  Bottoms,  has  a  length  of  about  17  miles;  it  falls  about  155 
feet  in  this  distance,  or  at  the  rate  of  9  feet  per  mile.  For  14  miles  thence  to  the 
railroad  bridge  near  Kingsburg  the  fall  is  about  1.83  feet  per  mile.  It  is  about  2 
feet  per  mile  throughout  the  rest  of  the  river's  course  to  Tulare  Lake. 


262  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  river  about  the  Narrows  flows  in  beds  of  cobbles;  it  has  ill-defined  banks. 
At  high  stages  it  covers  large  areas  of  the  bottom  lands.  Below7  the  Narrows  its 
channel  is  in  sand.  It  is  closely  confined  between  the  high  bluffs  already  described 
until  it  passes  Kingsburg,  where  the  bluffs  retreat  from  the  river  and  are  gradually 
lost  in  the  general  level  of  the  valley  plain.  The  barrier  built  by  Kings  River  and 
extended  by  it  across  the  trough  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  is  at  its  lowest  point 
about  30  feet  higher  than  the  lake  bed,  and  30  miles  will  barely  express  its  breadth 
from  south  to  north. 

LANDS   IRRIGATED. 

San  Joaquin  Valley,  with  its  area  of  11,500  square  miles,  is  centrally  located  in 
California.  It  extends  in  a  northwesterly  direction  from  the  Tejon  Mountains  on 
the  south  to  its  junction  with  Sacramento  Valley  on  the  north.  The  two  valleys 
together  form  the  great  Central  Valley  of  California.  San  Joaquin  Valley  has  a 
length  of  250  miles  and  an  average  breadth  of  over  40  miles.  Place  the  observer 
where  you  will  in  the  valley  and  he  has  before  and  about  him  a  vast  expanse  of  land 
almost  as  smooth  to  the  eye  as  the  surface  of  a  great  expanse  of  water.  Place  him  a 
little  to  the  southwestward  of  the  center  of  the  valley,  face  to  the  northeast,  and  he 
has  before  him,  low  down  toward  the  horizon,  the  distant  blue,  perhaps  snow-capped, 
Sierra  Nevada.  If  he  be  thus  placed  just  to  the  westward  of  the  valley  trough,  he 
can  look  across  the  great  east-side  valley  plain  toward  the  point  where  Kings  Kiver 
breaks  through  the  foothills,  but  the  distance  is  too  great  to  fix  clearly  the  point 
where  the  river  enters  upon  its  course  across  the  valley.  To  the  right,  in  the  fore- 
ground, lies  the  dry  bed  of  Tulare  Lake,  which  was  but  recently  a  great  lake,  cover- 
ing at  its  flood  stages  about  750  square  miles,  but  now  showing  encroachment  of 
cultivated  areas  along  its  northern,  eastern,  and  southeastern  margins,  but  still  pre- 
senting several  hundred  square  miles  of  bare,  rough  surface,  most  recently  uncovered, 
having  the  appearance  of  parched  and  cracking  clayey  soil. 

A  little  farther  removed  and  to  the  northeastward  of  the  lake  area  the  verdant 
fields  of  the  Mussel  Slough  country  strike  the  eye  and  stretch  far  away  toward  the 
east.  Here  the  broad  patches  of  green  of  the  alfalfa  fields  are  pleasantly  diversified 
with  the  varying  shades  of  green  of  the  vineyards,  orchards,  and  green  fields. 
Merging  into  this  section  is  a  broad  belt  of  oaks,  marking  the  line  from  the  northeast 
toward  the  observer  of  the  main  delta  channels  of  Kings  River,  and  still  farther 
north  are  the  broad  pasture  lands  of  the  Rancho  Laguna  de  Tache. 

Somewhat  nearer  at  the  left  and  disappearing  in  the  distance  toward  the  north- 
west is  the  Fresno  Swamp  country,  from  which  all  signs  of  swamp  have  been  fast 
disappearing,  where  patches  of  alfalfa  and  of  grain,  occasional  groups  of  trees  and 
buildings  give  evidence  of  thrift  and  energy,  and  of  at  least  temporary  success  of  the 
efforts  to  bring  even  the  freshet  flow  of  the  river  under  control. 

Directly  in  front  of  the  observer,  in  the  foreground  of  the  picture,  is  a  small 
pond  or  lake — Summit  Lake — which  has  an  elevation  about  30  feet  greater  than  the 
elevation  of  Tulare  Lake  bed,  and  which  lies  upon  the  course  of  the  flood-water  flow 
of  the  main  lake.  In  ordinary  seasons,  and  while  Tulare  Lake  is  not  full,  some  of 
the  Kings  River  flood  water  finds  its  way  to  this  lake  through  some  of  the  delta 
channels. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  263 

From  the  stand  occupied  by  the  observer,  his  vision  can  not  penetrate  to  the  still 
greater  irrigated  districts  lying  far  to  the  northeast,  fairly  well  covering  the  portion 
of  tho.  (-:ist-side  valley  plain  between  Kings  River  and  San  Joaquin  River,  nor  to  the 
broad  area  south  of  Kings  River  watered  by  the  great  76  Canal. 

All  of  these  lands  lie  before  him,  a  great  smooth-surfaced  plain  without  an 
undulation,  not  a  hill,  mound,  or  ridge  that  the  eye  can  detect  to  break  the  monotony 
of  the  landscape;  and  all  of  these  lands,  embracing  an  area  of  about  1,500  square 
miles,  are  dependent  upon  Kings  River  as  a  source  of  water  for  irrigation,  and  most 
of  them  without  the  artificial  application  of  water  would  be  unfit  for  ordinary  agri- 
cultural purposes. 

That  portion  of  the  east-side  plain  of  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  which  extends  from 
the  San  Joaquin  River  on  the  north  to  the  Kings  River  on  the  south,  and  westerly 
almost  to  Fresno  Swamp,  is  generally  referred  to  as  the  Fresno  Plains.  In  the  heart 
of  this  region  is  Fresno,  a  prosperous  town  of  about  15,000  inhabitants,  depending 
almost  entirely  upon  the  farming  region  round  about  it,  which  has  been  made  pro- 
ductive by  water,  and  which  was  a  barren,  dry,  sand  waste  before  its  fertility  was 
demonstrated  with  the  introduction  of  water  by  irrigation  canals. 

The  foothill  drainage  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  at  its  eastern  margin  gullied  out 
channels  which  carried  the  freshet  run  off  from  the  foothill  slopes  a  few  miles  out 
into  the  treeless  sandy  plain,  and  there  it  disappeared.  A  few  of  these  natural  water 
courses  have  now  been  converted  into  branches  of  canals,  and  their  flow  has  been 
brought  under  some  kind  of  control.  That  this  arrangement  is  not  wholly  satisfac- 
tory has  repeatedly  been  made  evident  by  the  inundations  which  periodically  occur 
at  Fresno  and  in  its  vicinity. 

Soils  being  saturated,  the  sinks  of  the  creeks  can  no  longer  dispose  of  the  same 
volumes  as  before  and  the  run  off  seeks  some  outfall  point  farther  to  the  west. 
When  another  wet  winter  or  two  shall  have  further  inconvenienced  the  people  now 
residing  along  the  path  of  these  storm  waters,  some  steps  will  no  doubt  be  taken  to 
make  suitable  provision  for  surface  drainage.. 

The  slope  of  the  Fresno  Plains  is  greatest  near  the  base  of  the  hills.  It  falls  at 
first  10  to  20  feet  per  mile,  but  soon  flattens  to  a  fall  of  5  to  7  feet  per  mile  in  a  gen- 
eral direction  from  northeast  to  southwest. 

The  soil  is  for  the  most  part  a  granitic  sandy  loam,  being  of  heavier  character 
near  the  hills  than  near  Fresno,  and  often  fine  grained  enough  to  be  locally  classed 
"as  white-ash  land  westward  of  Fresno.  Shallow  soil  is  rarely  encountered — most 
frequently  in  the  "hog- wallow"  tracts  northward  of  Fresno,  toward  San  Joaquin 
River.  At  the  sinks  of  the  water  courses  the  soil  is  generally  of  a  more  clayey  char- 
acter and  is  deeper  than  elsewhere  in  this  region.  The  general  fertility  of  the  soils 
of  the  region  is  unquestioned.  Hardpan  substrata  are  not  everywhere  encountered. 
They  sometimes  occur,  as  at  points  in  Central  Colony  and  elsewhere  near  Fresno,  at 
1  to  3  feet  below  the  ground's  surface,  but  generally  are  10  feet  or  more  below  the 
surface. 

The  Fresno  Plains  are  watered  by  the  upper  north-side  group  of  the  Kings  River 
canals.  Lands  are  subdivided  into  comparatively  small  holdings,  generally  20  to  iO 
acres  in  the  many  colony  tracts,  and  80  to  320  acres  in  the  rest  of  the  district.  Vine- 
vards  forming  the  basis  of  the  great  raisin  and  wine  industries,  orchards  (including 


264  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS.  IN   CALIFORNIA. 

citrus  fruits,  notably  near  Centerville),  alfalfa  and  grain  fields  are  more  or  less 
compactly  grouped  throughout  this  region. 

As  a  southwesterly  extension  of  this  region  the  Wildflower  country  may  be 
named.  This  is  the  region  originally  commanded  by  the  Emigrant  Canal,  lying  to 
the  northward  of  the  delta  channels  of  Kings  River.  Still  farther  west  are  the  Lib- 
erty and  Millrace  settlements,  and  bordering  the  river,  between  the  main  stream  on 
the  south  and  extending  beyond  Cole  (or  Murphy)  Slough  on  the  north,  is  the  Laguna 
de  Tache  Rancho. 

The  lands  of  the  Wildflower  and  Liberty  districts  are  for  the  most  part  very 
sandy. 

The  Fresno  Swamp  lands,  of  which  the  area  irrigated  with  Kings  River  water  is 
becoming  notable,  have  a  soil  which  may  be  classed  as  black  vegetable  mold.  Upon 
either  side  of  the  area,  which  was  originally  tule-covored,  and  extending  far  beyond 
the  extreme  flood  limits,  is  the  bad-land  strip,  strongly  alkaline,  generally  hog 
wallow,  and  not  yet  worth  any  effort  at  reclamation. 

The  Laguna  de  Tache  lands,  except  such  portions  as  fall  within  the  limits  of  the 
alkaline  belt,  are  of  recent  alluvial  formation,  deep  sandy  soils  predominating.  The 
marginal  portion  of  the  rancho,  which,  with  other  lands  held  under  one  ownership, 
has  an  area  of  about  68,000  acres,  lies  in  the  delta  of  Kings  River,  and  is  traversed 
by  the  water  courses  formed  by  the  overbank  flow  toward  the  north  and  west  from 
the  main  channel  of  the  river. 

South  of  the  river,  extending  southwesterly  from  the  base  of  the  foothills  for  a 
distance  of  about  15  miles,  are  the  lands  watered  by  the  76  Canal.  These  extend 
southward  to  Cottonwood  Creek,  and  westerly  almost  to  the  delta  region  of  the 
river.  This  district  is  cut  in  two  by  the  only  valley  tributary  of  the  river,  Wahtoke 
Creek,  which  is  a  small  foothill  stream  that  drops  into  Centerville  Bottoms  from  the 
southeast,  and  which  is  crossed  where  it  leaves  the  base  of  the  hills  by  the  76  Canal. 
The  soil  of  the  76  country  is  somewhat  heavier  and  in  places  coarser  than  that  of  the 
Fresno  Plains.  Most  of  it,  however,  is  still  to  be  classed  as  sandy  loam. 

At  the  western  limit  of  this  district  and  between  it  and  the  delta  of  the  river 
is  the  broad  alkaline  belt  of  waste  lands,  more  or  less  covered,  according  to  the 
character  of  the  seasons,  with  a  deep  efflorescence  of  alkaline  salts. 

Beyond  the  alkaline  strip  lies  the  southern  half  or  the  river's  delta,  the  Mussel 
Slough  country,  with  its  fertile  alluvial  sands,  and  the  broad  belt  of  dark  alluvial 
soil  which  passes  from  northeast  to  southwest  centrally  through  this  region.  Soils 
are  here  deep;  hardpan  is  unknown.  The  surface  of  the  country  lies  almost  on  a 
horizontal  plane,  having  a  fall  of  only  2  to  4  feet  per  mile,  south  westerly  toward 
Tulare  Lake. 

Except  for  the  fine  growth  of  oaks  in  the  Centerville  Bottoms,  and  the  oaks, 
cottonwoods,  and  willows  skirting  the  delta  channels  of  Kings  River,  the  entire  region 
under  discussion  was  originally  treeless.  The  soil  was  but  sparsely  covered  with 
nutritious  grasses;  very  little  other  vegetation  was  to  be  seen. 

Water,  wherever  applied,  has  demonstrated  the  productiveness  of  the  lands, 
which  without  it  were  barely  fit  for  pasturage. 


WATKR    AI'PKOl'KI. \TION     FROM     KINGS     KIVKK. 


265 


TULARE   LAKE. 

It  is '  not  without  interest  to  note  in  connection  with  this  inquiry  that  Tulare 
Lake  has  for  several  years  been  dry,  and  that  there  lias  been  no  overflow  from  it  into 
Fresno  Swamp  since  about  1876. 

On  the  basis  of  such  information  as  has  been  obtainable  a  diagram  of  the  fluctua- 
tions of  the  hike's  surface  has  been  prepared,  to  which,  as  a  general  indication  of  the 
character  of  the  seasons,  a  diagram  of  the  rainfall  at  San  Francisco  has  been  added 
(Fig.  12.) 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  flood  flow  of  all  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  streams  was 
exceptionally  large  in  the  winters  of  1861-62  and  1867-68;  also  that  the  rainfall  rec- 


RAINFALL  AT  SAN  FRANCISCO 
AND  THE  FLUCTUATIONS  IN  DEPTH  OF  TULAKE  LAKE 

BO  years.  18AO*  1899  Inclusive 


I 


h 


APPROXIMATE  WATER  SURFACE  FLUCTUATIONS  TULARE  LAKE 


V 


V 


s  s  z  g  s  g  s 


FIG.  12.— Rainfall  at  San  Francisco,  and  fluctuations  in  depth  of  Tulare  Lake. 

ord  at  San  Francisco  does  not  always  correctly  represent  the  conditions  that  prevail 
in  the  interior,  and  particularly  toward  the  south.  This  is  notably  true  with  seasons 
with  less  than  normal  rainfall. 

When  it  is  considered  that  vast  areas  of  land  on  Kern,  Tulc,  and  Kaweah  rivers, 
as  well  as  on  Kings  River,  the  lake's  principal  feeders,  have  been  under  irrigation, 
and  that  irrigation  canal  capacities  on  these  streams  in  the  aggregate  mount  into 
thousands  of  cubic  feet  per  second,  it  is  not  surprising  that  the,  recedence  of  the  lake 
is  generally  attributed  to  the  diversion  of  water  for  irrigation.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  use  of  water  for  agricultural  purposes  has  had  its  effect  upon  the  stages 
of  the  lake,  but  when  the  enormous  influx  into  the  lake  in  a  single  season — 1861-62, 


266  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

when  the  water  surface  rose  about  16  feet,  increasing  in  area  from  about  350  square 
miles  to  about  750  square  miles — is  taken  into  consideration,  it  appears  that  after  all 
the  prime  cause  of  the  recede.nce  of  the  lake  is  not  the  increased  use  of  water  for  irri- 
gation, but  the  long  interval  between  seasons  of  excessive  rainfall  and  the  recent 
long  sequence  of  seasons  with  precipitation  barely  normal,  or  less  than  normal.  It 
appears,  in  fact,  that  the  last  season  in  which  the  streams  of  San  Joaquin  Valley  were 
all  in  extreme  flood  was  that  of  1867-68.  This  is  now  so  remote  that  a  conclusion  as 
to  change  of  climate  might  almost  seem  warranted  were  it  not  that  Indian  tradition 
distinctly  points  to  a  still  earlier  period  than  that  covered  by  the  diagram  showing 
fluctuations,  when  the  lake  had  all  but  disappeared,  and  that  the  present  long  sequence 
of  dry  years  was  almost  equaled  by  that  of  1853-1861.  There  is  distinct  evidence, 
too,  that  at  some  former  period  of  the  lake's  history  there  was  a  protracted  low  stage 
(elevation  at  or  below  200),  being  a  period  of  sufficient  length  to  permit  willows  to 
grow  to  diameters  of  from  3  to  4  feet.1 

The  occurrence  of  successive  years  of  scant  rainfall,  notably  the  last  three 
seasons,  is  perhaps  serving  a  good  purpose. .  These  seasons  afford  a  better  and  more 
satisfactory  basis  for  determining  the  amount  of  water  that  can  be  relied  upon  for 
irrigation,  and  force  upon  the  water  taker  the  conviction  that  regulation  of  use, 
without  expensive  and  unsatisfactory  recourse  to  the  courts,  is  essential  for  their 
protection. 

RAINFALL  AND   CLIMATE. 

Rainfall  in  the  district  under  consideration  is  not  overabundant.  About  9  inches 
represent  the  mean  annual  fall  at  Fresno.  It  is  somewhat  less  farther  to  the  west 
and  considerably  more  at  the  base  of  the  Sierra  Nevada.  Practically  no  rain  falls 
from  May  1  to  November  1,  if  an  occasional  unwelcome  October  shower  be  excepted, 
which  now  and  then  drives  the  raisin  producer  under  cover.  Very  wet  seasons,  with 
rain  at  Fresno  in  excess  of  20  inches,  are  rare.  Those  with  rainfall  below  the  normal 
are  more  frequent.  Abo'ut  10  inches,  when  favorably  distributed  throughout  the 
winter  and  spring  months,  is  considered  enough  to  produce  fair  crops  of  grain. 
Failures  of  grain  crops  on  unirrigated  lands  are  much  more  frequent  than  are  good 
crops. 

The  summer  and  fall  of  the  year  are  dry  and  hot,  temperature  frequently  rising 
to  about  110°  F.  in  the  shade.  The  nights  are  rarely  oppressively  hot.  The  heat  of 
the  region  lacks  the  oppressiveness  of  the  moister  climates  of  the  East.  In  winter 
the  temperature  rarely  falls  below  22°,  though  temperatures  as  low  as  12°  have  been 
recorded.  Late  spring  frosts  are  dreaded,  but  are  fortunately  of  rare  occurrence. 
The  splendid  results  in  citrus  fruit  culture  to  be  noted  for  the  vicinity  of  Center- 
ville  (Kings  River)  are  sufficient  guaranties  of  the  mildness  of  the  winter  season. 

As  in  all  copiously  irrigated  regions,  where  no  effort  is  made  to  secure  good 
drinking  water,  there  has  been  more  or  less  sickness  of  a  malarial  type,  but  in  some 
of  the  districts  which  were  considered  least  healthful  twenty  years  ago,  as  near  Cen- 
terville,  there  is  now  comparatively  little  complaint. 

'SeeU.  S.  Geological  Survey,  Water-Supply  Paper  No.  17;  also  Report  of  Examining  Commis- 
sion on  Rivers  and  Harbors,  California,  1890,  page  69. 


WATER    AITKOI'KIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER. 


267 


THE  PLOW  OF  KINGS  RIVER. 

Most  of  the  precipitation  in  tho  watershed  of  Kings  Hiver  is  snow.  This  does 
not  ordinarily  melt  rapidly  until  in  the  warm  months  of  spring.  Now  and  then  a 
warm  winter  rain  overlaps  the  snow  belt,  and  its  volume,  added  to  by  the  melting 
snow,  produces  freshets  in  tho,  river.  These  are  generally  of  short  duration,  and 
may  occur  at  any  time  in  December,  January,  February,  or  March.  When  the 
warm  weather  of  spring  sets  in,  the  melting  snow  keeps  the  river  at  a  protracted 
high  stage  generally  during  April,  May,  and  June,  sometimes  much  later.  The 
maximum  flow  of  the  river  is  not  infrequently  20,000  to  40,000  cubic  feet  per  second, 
and  in  times  of  excessive,  rainfall,  as  in  1861-62  and  1867-68,  it  no  doubt  far  exceeds 
this  amount.  The  low-water  stage  is  reached  in  September  and  October,  and  gener- 
ally extends  into  November  and  December.  The  river,  after  seasons  of  about  normal, 
or  less  than  normal,  rainfall,  carries  about  200  to  300  cubic  feet  per  second  at  its  low- 
water  stages. 

Gagings  which  may  stand  as  close  approximations  of  the  flow  of  the  river  have 
been  made  as  follows: 

Discharge  of  Kings  River. 


Place. 

Date. 

Discharge. 

Authority. 

June  24  1881 

Cuticfcet 
per  second. 

6  050 

Do  

July  26,1881 

1  820 

Do 

Do 

June  20  1882 

366 

Do 

Do                                                                                                ..  . 

Nov.  19,1883 

266 

Do 

Near  Kingsburg,  between  Centerville  Bottoms  and  the  upper  group 
of  canals. 
Do  

Jan.   19,1882 
Nov.  22,1883 

59 

119 

Do. 

Do. 

Do...   . 

Aug.  15,1885 

158 

Do. 

Do  

Jan.   10,1895 

1,830 

U.  S.  Geological  Survey. 

Do  

Mar.  23,1895 

500 

Do. 

Do 

Dec      2  1895 

356 

Do. 

Do. 

Apr.   11,1896 

1,833 

Do. 

Do 

Feb     11,  1897 

905 

Do. 

Do.  .. 

Apr.     6,  1897 

828 

Do. 

Do 

June    3  1897 

5  959 

Do. 

Do.. 

July  17,1897 

503 

Do. 

Do 

Sept   10  1897 

221 

Do. 

Do... 

Nov.    3,  1897 

465 

Do. 

Do 

Dec    23  1897 

522 

Do. 

Do  .           .  .. 

Apr.   21,1898 

1,658 

Do. 

Do 

Slav   28  1898 

1,026 

Do. 

Do  

Jlllv   2(1,1X98 

305 

Do. 

Do 

Aug.  SO.  1X9X 

94 

Do. 

Sept.    3,  1895 

524 

Do. 

Do 

Nov.  24,18115 

248 

Do. 

Do  .                  

Apr.    12,1898 

1,748 

Do. 

Do 

June  12,1890 

15,941 

Do. 

Do 

Nov      1,18% 

401 

Do. 

Do 

Feb.   13,1897 

1,021 

Do. 

Do 

Apr.    5,  1897 

2,071 

Do. 

Do                                                                                                

June    1,1897 

8,838 

.    Do. 

Do  

July  15,1897 

3,313 

Do. 

Do... 

Sept.    9,1897 

296 

Do. 

268 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

i 

Discharge  of  Kings  River— Continued. 


Place. 

Date. 

Discharge. 

Authority. 

Nov.    1,  1897 

Cutncfeet 
per  second. 

552 

Do                                                             

Dec.  22,1897 

515 

Do 

Do 

Apr    20  1898 

4  943 

Do 

Do                                                                                         

May  29  1898 

2  672 

Do 

Do                                                                                

July   27,1898 

503 

Do 

Do  .                             

Aug.  31,1898 

244 

Do 

Do 

Dec    21  1898 

2  444 

Do 

Do 

Apr    19  1899 

5  409 

Do 

Do.                                                                   

May  15,1899 

4  422 

Do 

Do  

JlllH'    3,1899 

3  954 

Do 

Do  

June  2(>,  1899 

3  049 

Do 

Do 

Aug     2  1899 

608 

Do 

Do  

Sept    4,  1899 

206 

Do 

Do  

Dec.     8,  1899 

458 

Do 

Do 

Dec    21  1899 

974 

Do 

Do     .     . 

April  4  1900 

2  035 

Do 

Do  

May  16  1900 

6  436 

Do 

Do  

June  19  1900 

5  072 

Do 

Do 

Aug  10  1900 

472 

Do 

Do.. 

Sept     4  1900 

405 

Do 

Do  

Sept  27  1900 

220 

Do 

Based  on  a  rating  table  prepared  by  the  State  engineer,  and  a  record  of  the 
stages  of  water,  the  flow  of  Kings  River  above  all  canals  was  estimated  for  the  years 
1878-79  to  1883-84,  as  follows:1 

Estimated  monthly  flow  of  Kings  River  above  the  canals,  1878  to  1884. 


Month. 

1878-79. 

1879-80. 

1880-81. 

1881-82. 

1882-83. 

1883-84. 

Mean, 
1878-1884. 

Cu.fl. 
per  sec. 

300 

Cu.fl. 

per  sec. 

400 

Cu.fl. 
per  sec. 

220 

Cu.fl. 
per  sec. 

230 

Cu.ft. 
per  sec. 

470 

Cu.fl. 
per  sec. 

260 

Cu.fl. 
per  sec. 

290 

1  440 

510 

260 

340 

220 

370 

720 

870 

380 

320 

430 

870 

1  040 

2  430 

440 

340 

1  970 

1  120 

1  900 

1  250 

1  050 

April  

4  750 

5  230 

5  800 

3  170 

2  220 

3  370 

May  

5,090 

7  120 

8  220 

9  190 

6  700 

9  210 

7  588 

June  

3,760 

9,540 

5  010 

6  410 

6  730 

17  630 

8  180 

July 

1  650 

4  800 

4  790 

2  020 

1  460 

380 

1  150 

660 

620 

600 

September  

270 

370 

340 

390 

480 

880 

October  

280 

220 

250 

610 

420 

900 

1  See  Physical  Data  and  Statistics,  W.  H.  Hall,  State  engineer,  1886,  pp.  452, 476. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER. 


269 


Based  on  the  gagings  of  the  U.  S.  Geological  Survey,  the  estimated  monthly 
discharge  of  the  river  at  Red  Mountain,  1896  to  October,  1900,  has  been  as  follows: 

Estimated  monthly  flow  of  Kings  River  at  Red  Mountain,  1896  to  October,  1900. 


Month. 

1896. 

1897. 

1898. 

1899. 

1900. 

Mean, 

1896-1900. 

Cu.ft. 

per  sec. 

11  020 

Cu.ft. 
per  sec. 

624 

Cu.ft. 

per  sec. 

Cu.ft. 
per  sec. 

Cu.ft. 

per  sec. 

Co,,  ft. 

per  sec. 

1  140 

6  344 

1  170 

660 

March 

7  020 

4  408 

1  170 

April           

4  600 

9  380 

7  820 

4  512 

2  098 

Mav 

22  100 

22  732 

6  520 

3  568 

18,920 

10  580 

3  280 

6  477 

5  131 

July 

6  680 

4  04Q 

1  310 

1  411 

1  212 

1  100 

400 

411 

415 

708 

590 

480 

780 

215 

301 

510 

570 

728 

384 

1  076 

2  520 

285 

638 

550 

8  348 

1  450 

991 

As  the  rating  of  a  stream  is  more  or  less  affected  by  changes  in  the  configuration 
of  the  river  bottom,  and  no  record  of  these  changes  is  obtainable  between  gagings, 
due  allowance  should  be  made  for  this  element  of  uncertainty  in  using  figures  from 
the  above  tables.  They  are  least  reliable  for  the  low-water  period. 

Inspection  of  these  figures  and  the  great  variations  from  year  to  year  point  in 
the  first  place  to  the  value  of  continuous  records  of  this  character.  These  records 
show  an  abundant  supply  of  water  in  ordinary  years  during  the  very  period  when 
water  is  most  needed  by  the  irrigator — April,  May.  and  June.  In  these  months  the 
ordinary  flow  is  from  5,000  to  10,000  cubic  feet  per  second. 

WATER  STORAGE. 

Water  has  flowed  so  abundantly  in  Kings  River  that  but  little  inquiry  has  been 
made  in  reference  to  storage  facilities  in  the  river's  watershed;  and  there  are  no 
storage  reservoirs  of  note  now  in  service,  or  under  construction,  on  the  river  or  any 
of  its  tributaries.  It  is  not  within  the  proposed  scope  of  this  paper  to  deal  with  the 
possibilities  for  storage  which  undoubtedly  exists  at  various  points  in  its  watershed. 

CLAIMS  TO  WATER. 

There  seems  to  be  no  question  that  under  the  statute  of  appropriation  beneficial 
use  is  to  become  the  measure  of  the  right  acquired  to  use  the  water  appropriated, 
and  that  priority  of  such  beneficial  use  is  to  be  duly  recognized. 

Under  the  statute  above  mentioned,  claims  to  water  are  posted  at  the  points 
where  diversions  from  natural  streams  are  to  be  made.  The  notice  as  recorded  is 
rarely  accompanied  by  any  affidavit  that  it  has  actually  been  posted.  The  notice  is 
recorded  in  a  book  kept  for  the  purpose  at  the  county  seat.  If  work  commences 
within  sixty  days  after  the  posting  of  the  notice  and  is  diligently  prosecuted  to  the 
completion  of  the  work,  the  date  of  posting  the  notice  fixes  the  date  of  the  taking  of 
the  water.  No  facts,  other  than  the  intent  of  some  person  to  take  a  certain 


270  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

amount  of  water,  are  ordinarily  incorporated  in  the  record,  and  no  determination  is 
possible  from  the  record  whether  the  water  claimed  in  the  notice  is  actually  taken 
and  put  to  a  benefical  use,  or  whether  the  canal  or  ditch  has  been  constructed,  and  of 
what  dimensions  and  capacity.  No  standard  form  of  notice  is  prescribed  by  State 
or  county  authorities,  and  the  fact  of  the  posting  of  the  notice  is  not  verified  except 
in  a  very  few  cases.  If  a  claimant  assigns  his  rights  to  some  one  else,  and  the  location 
of  the  claim  is  not  stated  with  precision,  it  often  becomes  extremely  difficult  to  identify 
the  claim  or  claims  made  for  any  particular  canal;  in  fact,  without  the  aid  of  canal 
owners  and  a  complete  search  of  the  records  of  conveyances,  it  would  be  impossible 
to  assign  the  filings  to  the  respective  canals  and  ditches. 

The  facts  relating  to  canal  construction,  to  date  of  completion,  to  original 
capacities,  to  subsequent  enlargement,  to  extensions  and  kindred  matters,  do  not 
become  matters  of  record  until  a  dispute  between  rival  claimants  to  the  same  water 
brings  the  canal  owners  into  court,  and  even  then  the  findings  of  the  court,  based 
upon  the  weight  and  preponderance  of  evidence  and  conclusions  reached  by  the 
courts,  should  not  always  be  considered  final. 

Three  hundred  and  fifty-five  claims  to  water  and  water  apportionments,  the 
latter  made  by  the  county  boards  of  supervisors  acting  as  water  commissioners, 
could  be  identified  with  a  fair  degree  of  certainty  as  being  intended  to  appertain  to 
Kings  River  or  some  of  its  tributaries.  Thirteen  others  were  so  indefinitely  worded 
that  they  afforded  no  reliable  clew  to  the  stream  or  locality  where  the  original  was 
posted.  These  notices  have  been  abstracted  from  the  records  of  the  three  counties, 
Fresno,  Tulare,  and  Kings.  The  last-named  county  was  formed  a  few  years  ago  out 
of  a  portion  of  Tulare  County. 

63'  assuming  an  approximate  equivalent  for  the  claims  which  are  indefinite  in 
the  statement  of  amount  of  water  to  be  diverted,  and  which  fail  to  specify  the  dimen- 
sions of  the  canal  or  ditch  to  be  constructed,  it  is  found  that  these  filings  cover  an 
aggregate  of  about  750,000  cubic  feet  per  second,  of  which  about  100,000  can  readily 
be  identified  as  duplications.  A  mere  glance  at  the  estimated  flow  of  the  river 
(p.  269)  is  sufficient  to  show  the  extent  of  exaggeration  ordinarily  indulged  in  by 
the  water  claimant. 

The  notices  of  claims  to  water  from  Kings  River  tributaries,  so  far  as  they  could 
be  identified  as  relating  to  this  stream,  are  scattered  through  the  records  of  three 
counties,  Fresno,  Tulare,  and  Kings.1 

INSUFFICIENCY   OF   THE    RECORD. 

The  first  claim,  recorded  on  July  28,  1863,  was  to  "all  the  water"  of  Fish 
Creek. 

Two  years  later  Hiram  Dennis  described  his  appropriation  as  a  "ditch  20  feet 
wide." 

Jesse  Morrow,  in  1865,  recorded  a  claim  to  part  of  the  water  of  Kings  River 
sufficient  for  the  purposes  stated  in  his  notice. 

Jesse  Morrow,  William  Hazleton,  and  Harvey  Akers,  in  January,  1866,  claimed 

1 A  tabulated  abstract  of  the  records  of  claims  to  water  from  Kings  River  was  submitted  with  the 
report.  It  covered  42  pages  of  type-written  manuscript,  and  is  too  long  for  insertion  here. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  271 

the  "necessary  water"  for  a  ditch  to  commence  at  the  foot  of  Red  Mountain,  2.5 
miles  above  Akers's  place,  and  to  irrigate  lands  below  the  point  of  diversion. 

In  the  following  seven  claims  the  amounts  claimed  can  only  be  conjectured 
from  the  sizes  of  the  proposed  ditches:  Five  feet  wide,  2.5  feet  deep;  20  feet  wide; 
3  feet  wide  at  bottom;  10  feet  wide  at  bottom,  6  feet  deep;  10  feet  wide  at  bottom, 
2  feet  deep;  50  feet  wide  and  10  feet  deep;  20  feet  wide  on  bottom,  30  feet  wide  on 
top,  4  feet  deep,  and  one  which  merely  describes  the  purpose  of  the  claim  "irrigation 
and  watering  stock." 

The  seventh  of  these,  giving  top  and  bottom  width  of  canal  and  depth,  was  made 
by  M.  J.  Church,  at  the  head  of  the  Sweem  Ditch,  and  appears  to  have  been  intended 
as  a  notice  of  enlargement.  . 

A  claim  of  water  from  Wahtoke  Creek  is  for  "sufficient  water"  for  irrigation. 

John  Bensley,  on  behalf  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irri- 
gation Company,  on  June  17,  1871,  recorded  a  notice  of  a  claim  to  the  "first  right 
to  water  running  in  Kings  River." 

The  same  canal  company,  five  months  later,  claimed  the  waters  of  the  river  for 
•  15  miles  of  its  course. 

Such  expressions  as  "50  feet  of  water,"  "all  the  water  here  flowing,"  "20  cubic 
inches  of  water,"  "200  feet  under  -1-inch  pressure,"  "700  cubic  feet  under  4-inch 
pressure,"  "2  cubic  feet  running  water,"  "500,000  inches  per  second  under  4-inch 
pressure,"  " 5,184,000  cubic  inches  under  4-inch  pressure,"  "all  the  water  in  the 
lake,"  "2,000  miner's  inches  of  water  under  a  head  pressure  of  1  foot  per  second," 
"200  cubic  feet  at  the  rate  of  1  linear  foot  per  second,"  "400  cubic  feet  of  water," 
"sufficient  to  fill  ditch,"  are  typical  of  the  indefiniteness  which  is  found  in  these 
records  of  intent  to  take  water. 

Occasionally  a  definite  amount  named  in  a  claim  is  rendered  uncertain  by  further 
explanation,  such  as  "8,640,000  cubic  inches  per  second  (200,000  inches  under  4-inch 
pressure),"  which  may  be  held  to  mean  either  5,000  or  4,000  cubic  feet  per  second. 

The  location  at  which  the  notice  is  posted,  or  where  the  waters  are  to  be  diverted, 
is  generally  described  with  fair  precision,  but  sometimes  there  is  no  further  descrip- 
tion than  "at  the  point  where  this  notice  is  posted,"  which  is  now  and  then  made 
more  definite  by  reference  to  a  pine  or  alder  tree,  or,  far  better,  some  cabin  or 
residence  at  least  locally  known. 

There  is  rarely  anything  of  record  that  will  enable  an  identification  of  the  claims 
under  which  ditches  and  canals  which  have  been  constructed  take  water.  Neither 
is  any  record  made  of  the  date  of  commencement  of  work,  nor  of  its  diligent 
prosecution. 

When,  by  reason  of  an  increased  demand  for  water  for  any  ditch  or  canal,  the  same 
is  enlarged  and  its  works  are  so  altered  that  it  can  deliver  more  water,  the  date  of 
such  enlargement  and  the  condition  and  capacity  of  the  works  before  enlargement 
generally  live  only  in  the  memory  of  the  inhabitants,  and  where  such  enlargements 
have  been  made  it  is  more  than  probable  that  diligence  in  carrying  the  work  forward 
to  the  ultimate  condition  would  be  claimed  even  if  years  have  elapsed  between  the 
first  construction  and  the  enlargement.  Attempts  are  thus  often  made  to  date  back 
to  the  original,  taking  the  right  to  full  finished  canal  capacity,  when  controversy 
arises  with  other  claimants. 


272  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN   CALIFORNIA. 

Under  those  circumstances  the  recorded  copy  of  the  posted  notice  has  but  little, 
value,  if  any,  beyond  fixing  the  date  at  which  the  original  claimant  intended  to  take 
water  and  put  the  same  to  a  beneficial  use.  To  be  of  real  service,  even  in  this  respect, 
the  record  should  not  be  made  at  the  county  seat  of  the  county  in  which  posted,  but 
in  some  place  where  all  records  relating  to  the  same  stream  are  to  be  found. 

Kings  River,  after  all,  is  a  tributary  of  San  Joaquin  River — somewhat  uncertain 
of  flow  in  the  channels  which  it  sends  through  Fresno  Swamp,  and  particularly 
unreliable  in  the  matter  of  producing  an  overflow  from  Tulare  Lake — but  still  at 
times  an  important  feeder.  The  question  may  arise,  therefore,  as  to  the  extent  that 
riparian  ownership  on  the  San  Joaquin  River  may  affect  the  use  of  water  from  Kings 
River.  It  may  seem  a  remote  question  to  raise,  but  the  principle  involved  is  the 
same  as  on  a  stream  known  throughout  its  course  by  only  one  name,  and  is  alluded 
to  for  the  purpose  of  illustrating  how  imperfectly  the  rights  of  water  takers  are 
protected.  The  bank-land  owner,  hundreds  of  miles  below,  may,  perhaps,  be  pre- 
sumed to  periodically  search  the  records  of  half  a  dozen  counties  to  see  whether  any 
one  intends  to  take  the  water  he  is  entitled  to  have  flow  past  his  property.  Does  he 
do  so?  The  appropriate!'  hundreds  of  miles  above  him,  on  the  other  hand,  is  safe 
in  his  taking  only  after  the  downstream  bank-land  owners  have  all  slept  on  their 
rights  five  years  or  more,  and  even  then  only  if  there  be  not  some  minor  heir  to 
interfere  at  a  still  later  period. 

The  notice  of  a  claim  as  recorded  confers  no  right  to  water  or  to  its  use.  To 
establish  this  right  it  is  necessary  to  furnish,  when  required  by  adverse  claimants, 
proof  of  the  taking,  of  compliance  with  the  law  in  this  respect,  and  of  the  amount 
put  to  beneficial  use. 

There  seems  to  be  no  way — unless  by  friendly  litigation,  and  this  has  its  dangers — 
in  which  the  appropriate!-  can  have  his  rights  judicially  defined. 

WATEK  LAWS  AND  WATER  RIGHTS. 

It  is  not  intended  to  present  a  full  review  of  the  laws  governing  the  right  to  use 
water  for  irrigation  in  this  State,  but  a  brief  reference  thereto  seems  essential  for  a 
full  understanding  of  the  purpose  of  the  notice  of  a  claim  to  water  as  well  as  of  the 
rights  of  an  appropriator  and  of  an  irrigator. 

Under  the  act  of  the  legislature  passed  in  1850,  which  declares  "the  common  law 
of  England,  so  far  as  it  is  not  repugnant  to  or  inconsistent  with  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  or  the  constitution  of  the  State  of  California,  shall  be  the  rule 
of  decision  in  all  the  courts  of  the  State,"  the  common-law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights 
has  been  recognized  and  enforced  by  the  courts  of  the  State  to  such  a  degree  as  to 
often  seriously  hamper  the  diversion  of  water  from  a  stream,  even  when  intended 
to  be  used  for  some  purpose  more  beneficial  than  any  it  could  serve  while  flowing  in 
its  natural  channel  to  a  place  of  outfall. 

The  vested  rights  under  this  doctrine  were  recognized  when  the  civil  code  was 
adopted  in  1872,  but  they  were  not  defined.  In  fact,  great  uncertainty  seems  yet  to 
exist  as  to  what  rights  to  the  use  of  water  the  riparian  doctrine  confers.  As  some- 
times interpreted,  giving  to  the  bank-land  owner  the  right  to  see  the  water  of  a 
stream  flow  "undim unshed  in  quantity  and  unimpaired  in  purity,"  the  doctrine  has 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  273 

always  been  and  will  always  prove  a  great  obstacle  to  the  diversion  of  water  for  such 
purposes  as  use  in  mining,  irrigation,  industrial  purposes,  and  for  domestic  use. 

It  docs  not  appear  from  decisions  rendered  that  the  rights  conferred  and  actually 
vested  have  yet.  been  clearly  defined.  The  use  to  which  water  may  be  put  and  the 
extent  of  the  tract  to  which  the  vested  right  appertains  seems  to  be  still  indefinite 
and  peculiar  to  each  particular  case.  No  distinction  seems  to  have  yet  been  drawn 
between  lands  extending  back  from  the  margin  of  a  stream  5  rods  and  others  that 
extend  back  5  miles.  The  question,  too,  as  to  the  extent  to  which  any  riparian  owner 
may  diminish  the  flow  of  water  in  putting  it  to  some  use  seems  to  remain  unanswered. 
The  intent  under  the  riparian  doctrine  seems  to  be  that  there  shall  be  no  material 
reduction. 

The  results  of  the  decisions  recognizing  that  under  this  doctrine  certain  rights 
have  been  vested  has  been  to  compel  appropriators  who  had  use  of  water  for  town 
supply,  for  mining,  for  irrigation,  or  for  other  purposes  involving  an  actual  diminu- 
tion of  flow  in  the  stream  from  which  water  is  taken,  to  negotiate  with  riparian  own- 
ers and  to  pajr,  often  excessively,  for  a  waiver  of  their  vested  rights.  So  long  as 
these  rights  remain  indeterminate,  varying  with  size  and  shape  and  topographical 
features  of  the  riparian  tract,  such  adjustments  are  made  extremely  difficult  and  bur- 
densome to  new  enterprises. 

As  the  common-law  doctrine  was  not  found  compatible  with  the  early  and  soon 
firmly  established  customs  of  the  miners  who  have  use  for  water  at  points  far  removed 
from  the  natural  water  courses,  these  customs  quickly  established  a  right  to  the  use 
of  any  water  not  already  appropriated,  and  this  custom  quickly  crystallized  into 
statutory  law  as  follows: 

The  right  to  the  use  of  running  water  flowing  in  a  river  or  stream,  or  down  a  canyon  or  ravine, 
may  IK-  acquired  by  appropriation. 

The  appropriation  must  be  for  some  useful  or  beneficial  purpose,  and  when  the  appropriator  or  his 
successor  in  interest  ceases  to  use  it  for  such  purpose,  the  right  ceases. 

The  person  entitled  to  the  use  may  change  the  place  of  diversion,  if  others  are  not  injured  by  such 
change,  and  may  extend  the  ditch,  flume,  pipe,  or  aqueduct  by  which  the  diversion  is  made  to  places 
beyond  that  where  the  first  use  was  made. 

The  water  appropriated  may  be  turned  into  the  channel  of  another  stream  and  mingled  with  its 
water,  and  then  reclaimed;  but  in  reclaiming  it  the  water  already  appropriated  by  another  must  not 
be  diminished. 

As  between  appropriators,  the  one  first  in  time  is  the  first  in  right. 

A  person  desiring  to  appropriate  water  must  post  a  notice,  in  writing,  in  a  conspicuous  place  at  the 
point  of  intended  diversion,  stating  therein: 

(1)  That  he  claims  the  water  there  flowing  to  the  extent  of  (giving  the  number)  inches,  measured 
under  a  4-inch  pressure. 

(2)  The  purpose  for  which  he  claims  it,  and  the  place  of  intended  use. 

(3)  The  means  by  which  he  intends  to  divert  it,  and  the  size  of  the  flume,  ditch,  pipe,  or  aque- 
duct in  which  he  intends  to  divert  it. 

A  copy  of  the  notice  must,  within  ten  days  after  it  is  posted,  be  recorded  in  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  posted. 

Within  sixty  days  after  the  notice  is  posted  the  claimant  must  commence  the  excavation  or  con- 
struction of  the  works  in  which  he  intends  to  divert  the  water,  and  must  prosecute  the  work  diligently 
and  uninterruptedly  to  completion,  unless  temporarily  interrupted  by  snows  or  rain;  provided,  that  if 
the  erection  of  a  dam  has  been  recommended  by  the  California  Debris  Commission  at  or  near  the  place 
where  it  is  intended  to  divert  the  w-ater,  the  claimant  shall  have  sixty  days  after  the  completion  of  such 

23856— No.  100—01 18 


274  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

dam  in  which  to  commence  the  excavation  or  construction  of  the  works  in  which  he  intends  to  divert 
the  water. 

By  "completion"  is  meant  conducting  the  waters  to  the  place  of  intended  use. 

By  a  compliance  with  the  above  rules  the  claimant's  right  to  the  use  of  the  water  relates  back  to 
the  time  the  notice  was  posted. 

A  failure  to  comply  with  such  rules  deprives  the  claimants  of  the  right  to  the  use  of  the  water  as 
against  a  subsequent  claimant  who  complies  therewith. 

Persons  who  have  heretofore  claimed  the  right  to  water,  and  who  have  not  constructed  works  in 
which  to  divert  it,  and  who  have  not  diverted  nor  applied  it  to  some  useful  purpose,  must,  after  this 
title  takes  effeet,  and  within  twenty  days  thereafter,  proceed  as  in  this  title  provided,  or  their  right 
ceases. 

The  recorder  of  each  county  must  keep  a  book,  in  which  he  must  record  the  notices  provided  for 
in  this  title. 

The  rights  of  riparian  proprietors  are  not  affected  by  the  provisions  of  this  title. 

This  last  section  referring  to  riparian  rights  has  been  repealed.  But  as  the  sec- 
tion conferred  no  right  its  appeal  takes  nothing  from  the  chapter,  neither  does  it 
strengthen  the  cause  of  the  appropriator.  No  matter  what  danger  may  lurk  in  the 
doctrine  of  riparian  rights  there  was  very  little  danger  in  this  section  of  the  code. 
Whatever  rights  are,  or  have  been,  vested  by  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  will 
remain  vested  rights  until,  by  the  right  of  eminent  domain,  they  are  condemned  for 
some  higher  beneficial  purpose. 

Whenever  water  is  appropriated  for  the  purpose  of  being  sold  for  domestic  use, 
or  for  irrigation  and  the  watering  of  stock,  the  supervisors  of  the  counties  wherein 
the  water  is  to  be  sold,  or  the  town  trustees,  as  the  case  may  be,  have  the  right  to 
establish  water  rates;  but  these  rates  are  to  be  such  as  afford  a  reasonable  return  upon 
the  value  of  the  plant  or  canal  in  use. 

As  a  result  of  the  efforts  of  a  large  number  of  advocates  of  the  doctrine  that  land 
and  the  water  to  irrigate' it  should  be  hold  in  joint  ownership  an  irrigation-district 
law  was  passed  in  1887.  Provision  was  made  for  the  ordering  of  an  election  for  the 
organization  of  districts  on  petition  of  fifty  or  a  majority  of  the  freeholders  of  the 
proposed  district.  Lands  included  in  any  district  were  to  be  susceptible  of  irrigation 
from  a  common  source.  County  supervisors  were  given  power  to  grant  or  deny 
petitions  from  freeholders  desiring  to  form  districts.  They  could  order  the  neces- 
sary election  and  could  amend  boundaries.  District  directors  (five  in  number)  were 
elected  from  divisions  into  which  the  districts  were  divided.  Upon  the  adoption  of 
plans  and  the  making  of  an  estimate  of  cost  by  an  engineer  bonds  were  issued  and 
their  sale  was  permitted  at  not  less  than  90  per  cent  of  their  face  value.  In  voting 
on  the  formation  of  the  district  and  on  the  issuance  of  bonds  no  property  qualification 
was  prescribed. 

This  irrigation-district  law  has  proven  a  serious  obstacle  to  healthful  irrigation 
development  in  this  State.  The  machinery  for  the  application  of  the  fundamental 
principle  has  proven  inadequate.  The  district  law  withstood  successfully  the  most 
vigorous  legal  attacks,  yet  the  affairs  of  no  district  have  been  so  managed  as  to  escape 
such  attacks  or  to  fully  satisfy  the  expectations  of  the  landowners. 

There  should  have  been  State  instead  of  local  control  at  the  very  outset  of  district 
formation.  The  sufficiency  of  the  water  supply  and  the  extent  of  the  district  should 
have  been  vouched  for  by  the  State  engineer  or  by  some  department  equivalent  to  a 
professional  department  of  public  works.  Only  property  owners  should  have  had  a 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVKR.  'J75 

voice  in  the  formation  of  the  districts  and  in  the  issuance  of  bonds.  Voting  should, 
moreover,  have  been  proportional,  or  m-arly  so,  to  the  value  of  the  property  repre- 
sented by  each  voter.  Much  better  results  would,  it  i.s  thought,  have  been  attained 
if  bonds  for  the  construction  of  the  works  had  been  issued  by  the  State  and  the 
works  had  been  constructed  by  the  State  for  the  benefit  of  the  district.  The  State 
might  have  been  given  the  right  to  levy  a  tax  upon  the  district  to  pay  interest,  and 
it  might  have  retained,  control  of  all  works  of  diversion  and  delivery  of  water  into 
the  districts  until  such  time  as  it  had  been  recouped  for  its  outlay  and  all  bonds  were 
redeemed. 

The  law,  as  enacted,  was  constantly  being  evaded.  Bonds  were  sold  to  third 
parties  in  order  to  be  passed  from  the  district  to  contractors  who  could  not  receive 
them  in  direct  payment  for  work  done.  The  work  for  which  they  were  received  was 
contracted  for  at  high  prices  in  order  that  bonds  could  be  disposed  of  at  values  far 
below  par  and  still  compensate  the  contractor  for  his  outlay.  Or  works  were  con- 
structed at  private  expense  with  an  understanding  that  they  would  be  bought  with 
district  bonds  on  completion — the  law  permitting  completed  works  to  be  thus  paid 
for.  Large  blocks  of  bonds,  too,  were  delivered  in  payment  for  reputed  water 
rights.  Districts  were  formed  on  petitions  of  freeholders  who  had  accepted  donations 
of  worthless  land,  a  few  acres  apiece,  in  order  to  qualify  as  freeholders.  In  other 
cases  the  difficulties  of  securing  an  adequate  water  supply  had  not  been  well  considered. 
The  districts  were  misled  by  low  estimates  of  cost,  and  after  construction  had  been 
commenced  to  make  the  work  already  done  of  value,  they  had  to  increase,  often 
double,  the  bond  issue.  In  other  districts  the  burden  of  taxation  became  so  great 
that  every  effort  has  been  and  is  being  made  to  evade  payment  of  the  incurred 
obligations. 

Of  all  the  districts  (over  thirty)  organized  in  the  State  very  few  are  to-day  in  suc- 
cessful operation.  One  of  these,  though  not  free  from  troubles  of  its  own,  is  the 
Alta  Irrigation  District,  referred  to  later  on.  Two  others,  dependent  01,  Kings  River 
water,  had  been  organized,  but  are  now  defunct.  These  were  the  Selma  district,  in 
which  a  bond  issue  was  repeatedly  defeated,  and  the  Sunset  district,  whose  organiza- 
tion has  been  declared  illegal. 

The  statutes  are  silent  as  to  the  rights  to  subsurface  and  artesian  waters,  and 
here  again  common  law  becomes  the  rule  of  decision.  The  tendency  of  recent  deci- 
sions seems  to  be  to  protect  a  prior  user  when  the  subsurface  waters  flow  in  a  well- 
defined  subsurface  channel. 

The  landowner  who  prepares  his  land  for  irrigation  and  to  whom  water  is  fur- 
nished by  a  canal  corporation,  is  by  law  granted  a  continuous  right  to  obtain  water 
from  the  same  corporation.  The  statute  provides: 

Whenever  any  corporation,  organized  under  the  laws  of  this  State,  furnishes  water  to  irrigate 
lands  which  said  corporation  lias  sold,  the  right  to  the  flow  and  use  of  said  water  is  and  shall  remain 
a  perpetual  easement  to  the  land  so  sold  at  such  rates  and  terms  as  may  he  established  by  said  corpo- 
ration in  pursuance  of  law;  and  whenever  any  person  who  is  cultivating  land  on  the  line  and  within 
the  flow  of  any  ditch  owned  by  such  corporation  has  been  furnished  water  by  it  with  which  to  irrigate 
his  land,  such  person  shall  be  entitled  to  the  continued  use  of  said  water  upon  the  same  terms  as  those 
who  have  purchased  their  land  of  the  corporation. 


'276  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

WATER-RIGHT  LITIGATION. 

A  search  of  the  court  records  of  the  three  counties  through  which  Kings  River 
flows  has  been  made,  and  abstracts  of  a  number  of  cases,  showing  the  basis  of  com- 
plaint, the  answer,  and  the  decree  of  the  court  (if  judgment  has  been  rendered),  are 
noted  in  the  abstracts  which  are  herewith  presented. '  The  abstracts  cover  ±"2  cases 
in  Fresno  County,  42  cases  in  Tulare  County,  and  19  cases  in  Kings  County,  and 
these  by  no  means  represent  all  the  litigation  relating  to  water  and  water  rights,  but 
cover  only  the  principal  cases  in  which  the  rights  of  ditches  and  canals  to  divert 
water  from  the  river  or  its  branches  are  brought  into  question.  The  list  could  be 
supplemented  with  many  more  relating  to  controversies  between  water  consumers 
and  the  canal  companies  which  are  furnishing  the  water,  and  others  relating  to  the 
validity  of  the  formation  of  irrigation  districts  and  kindred  matters.  Time  and 
means  have  not  permitted  this  inquiry  to  be  made  complete. 

When  the  lands  bordering  upon  Kings  River  in  its  course  from  the  foothills  to 
the  valley  trough  were  sold  tnere  was  doubt  as  to  whether  the  riparian  doctrine 
prevailed  in  this  State,  and  even  after  being  recognized  by  the  courts  this  doctrine, 
by  reason  of  the  vagueness  and  uncertainty  of  the  definition  of  the  rights  of  the 
riparian  owner  and  of  the  extent  of  riparian  lands  (particularly  when  the  riparian 
owner  himself  often  claims  under  this  doctrine  merely  to  become  an  appropriator), 
was  but  little  heeded  when  the  matter  of  making  a  water  appropriation  was  under 
consideration.  In  view  of  the  abundance  of  the  water  supply,  the  earliest  ditch 
builders  felt  secure  under  the  sanction  of  custom  and  the  language  of  the  statute 
which  permitted  the  taking  of  water  for  beneficial  purposes.  They  preferred  to  rely 
upon  the  fact  of  the  taking  rather  than  upon  official  records  to  establish  a  claim  or 
a  right  to  the  use  of  water  as  against  other  takers  or  often  against  riparian  owners. 
The  demand  for  better  and  clearly  defined  regulations  in  the  matter  of  acquiring  the 
right  to  use  water  has  not  therefore  been  as  urgently  pressed  as  circumstances  would 
seem  to  warrant.  This  has  no  doubt  been  also  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  appropri- 
ators  themselves  have  often  preferred  to  first  let  sufficient  time  elapse  for  the  perfec- 
tion of  their  own  works,  with  extensions  and  increased  beneficial  use,  before  inviting 
thorough  judicial  inquiry  and  equitable  apportionment. 

In  the  upper  portions  of  the  valley  section  of  Kings  River  it  flows  through  the 
Centerville  Bottoms  in  a  network  of  channels,  and  all  the  lands  bordering  the  river 
appear,  under  the  riparian  doctrine,  to  have  some  rights  that  were  encroached  upon 
by  the  canals  and  ditches  taking  water  from  points  above  or  near  the  upper'end  of 
the  bottom  lands.  So,  too,  the  lands  bordering  upon  the  delta  channels,  and,  in  fact, 
most  of  the  lands  of  the  river  delta,  notably  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  and  the 
large  holdings  along  the  southerly  bank  of  the  main  stream,  have  under  this  doctrine 
been  in  a  position  to  interpose  legal  objections  and  obstacles  with  more  or  less  success 
to  the  taking  of  water  by  the  canals.  It  has  not  always  been  a  question  of  compelling 
the  canal  companies  to  pay  for  the  damage  done  b}'  the  diverting  of  water,  but  the 
controversies  have  almost  invariably  been  in  the  nature  of  attempts  to  estop  the 
taking  entirely.  Proceedings  to  accomplish  this  are  often  postponed  until  long  after 
the  canal  is  constructed  and  in  service.  The  enforcement  of  a  decree  is  then  often 


1  The  abstracts  referred  to  cover  130  pages  of  typewritten  matter  and  are  too  long  for  insertion. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  277 

thought  to  be  an  unbearable  hardship,  and  there  are  canals  on  the  river  to-day  appar- 
ently evading  decrees  of  the  courts,  which  deny  them  the  right  to  take  water. 

As  a  result  of  the  suits  brought  by  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho, 
who  control  in  the  aggregate  over  60,000  acres  of  land  in  one  body,  which  lies  for  the 
most  part  in  the  delta  region  of  the  river,  it  was,  on  July  21,  1885,  decreed  that  the 
Fowler  Switch  Canal  Company  should  take  no  water  from  Kings  River  and  should 
fill  in  the  head  of  its  canal.  On  September  12,  1885,  judgment  was  entered  against 
the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal  Company,  decreeing  that  its  canal  take  no 
water,  remove  all  dams  and  other  obstructions  from  Kings  River,  and  fill  in  the  head 
of  its  canal.  It  was  decreed  on  November  5,  1885,  that  the  Kings  River  and  Fresno 
Canal  Company  should  take  no  water  from  the  river  and  should  fill  in  the  head  of 
its  ditch.  This  decree  may  have,  in  part  at  least,  been  the  reason  for  the  passing 
of  this  canal  into  the  hands  of  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  now  con- 
trolled by  the  same  persons  who  own  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho.  A  similar  judg- 
ment was  entered  against  the  76  Canal,  or  Alta  Irrigation  District  Canal,  on  November 
4,  1889,  except  as  to  water  for  use  on  the  riparian  lands  irrigated  by  it  in  Fresno 
County.  All  these  decrees,  having  been  affirmed  by  the  supreme  court  of  the  State, 
appear  as  final  judgments.  When  we  still  find  these  canals  receiving  water  at  mean 
to  high  stages  of  the  river  it  may  be  inferred  that  they  do  so  on  tolerance. 

It  would  seem  more  logical  and  more  equitable  to  have  laws  so  administered  that 
either  these  canals  could  never  have  been  built  or  that,  having  been  built,  their 
rights  to  surplus  water  should  have  been  more  clearly  defined. 

As  above  stated,  one  of  these  canals,  the  Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal,  is  now 
owned  by  the  same  persons  who  own  the  Fresno  Canal  and  the  Laguna  de  Tache 
Rancho,  so  that  in  its  case,  plaintiff  having  absorbed  the  defendant,  the  court  deci- 
sion may  never  be  enforced. 

In  the  case  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal  the  decree  has  been  rendered  ineffectual, 
in  a  measure  at  least,  by  floating  the  water  right  of  the  Emigrant  Ditch,  in  part,  to 
the  head  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal,  it  having  happened  that  the  Emigrant  Ditch 
Company  was  more  fortunate  than  the  other  canal  companies  in  securing  a  court 
decision,  on  February  3,  1890,  denying  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  a 
cause  of  action,  and  decreeing  that  the  Emigrant  Ditch  has  a  capacity  of  190  cubic 
feet  per  second.  Branches  of  Fowler  Switch  Canal  extend  into  the  region  com- 
manded bv  the  Emigrant  Ditch  and  connect  with  the  branches  of  the  latter,  but  the 
head  of  Fowler  Switch  Canal  is  about  33  miles  above  the  original  head  of  the 
Emigrant  Canal. 

Of  the  decisions  rendered  by  the  courts  the  following  may  be  noted  as  of  more 
than  local  interest: l 

August  10,  1875,  the  Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal  Company  was  by  a  decree 
of  court  denied  the  right  to  use  Centerville  branch  of  Kings  River. 

November  5,  1885,  a  judgment  was  rendered  requiring  the  Kings  River  and 
Fresno  Canal  Company  to  remove  from  the  river,  and  from  the  Centerville  channel 
thereof,  all  dams  and  obstructions  placed  therein  by  that  company,  and  to  fill  the 
head  of  its  ditch  so  that  water  can  not  flow  from  the  river  or  from  said  channel 


1  Decisions  are  "here  noted  as  they  relate  to  each  canal  in  chronological  order,  being  repeated  for 
each  canal  to  which  they  relate. 


278  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

into  the  ditch,  and  enjoining  them  from  diverting  any  of  the  waters  of  the  river. 
Affirmed  by  supreme  court, 

August  10,  1875,  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  is  granted,  as 
against  the  other  claimants,  the  right  to  use  Centerville  channel  of  Kings  River  as  a 
part  of  its  canal  system. 

Januarj'  8,  1900,  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  received  judgment 
against  the  Alta  Irrigation  District  (76  Canal),  declaring  it  to  be  entitled  to  l,ono 
cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  An  appeal  is  pending. 

March  16,  1892,  it  was  decreed  that  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  is 
entitled  to  divert  100  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  and  no  more,  until  the  Lower 
Kings  River  Canal  is  supplied  with  159  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  that  its  acts  in 
diverting  500  cubic  feet  per  second  in  August,  September,  October,  November,  and 
December,  1877,  1878,  and  1879,  were  unlawful.  Appealed,  and  appeal  dismissed. 

March  6,  1892,  a  judgment  was  entered  declaring  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irriga- 
tion Company  entitled  to  divert  100  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  and  no  more, 
until  the  Last  Chance  Canal  is  supplied  with  190  cubic  feet  per  second.  Appealed, 
and  appeal  dismissed. 

September  12,  1885,  judgment  was  entered  decreeing  that  the  Centerville  and 
Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch  Company  is  required  to  remove  all  dams  and  other 
obstructions  placed  or  maintained  by  that  company  in  Kings  River,  and  enjoining 
it  from  diverting  any  waters  from  the  river  or  in  any  manner  interfering  with  the 
full  flow  of  its  water. 

February  25, 1900,  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch  Company  is 
awarded  600  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  the  prior  rights  of  the  Peoples  Ditch 
Company  to  274  cubic  feet  per  second,  of  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Com- 
pany to  182  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  of  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company 
to  217  cubic  feet  per  second.  It  is  also  decreed  that  the  so-called  Arkansas  Flat 
people  have  the  right  to  divert  from  Kings  River  into  China  Slough,  through  the 
Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Ditch,  19  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second;  but  this  right 
seems  also  to  be  subject,  under  the  decree,  to  the  prior  rights  of  the  other  canals. 
On  appeal. 

July  21,  1885,  a  judgment  was  entered  against  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal  Com- 
pany decreeing  that  that  company  be  ferever  enjoined  from  diverting  any  water 
from  Kings  River  and  from  obstructing  or  in  any  manner  interfering  with  the  flow 
of  its  waters.  Affirmed  by  the  supreme  court. 

February  3,  1890,  the  Emigrant  Ditch  Company  was  given  judgment  against  the 
owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho,  who  attempted  to  prevent  its  taking  water, 
and  it  was  decreed  that  its  canal  had  a  capacity  of  190  cubic  feet  per  second. 
Affirmed  by  the  supreme  court. 

April  17,  1885,  a  judgment  was  entered  debarring  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de 
Tache  Rancho  from  diverting  from  Kings  River  or  Cole  Slough  any  more  than  30 
cubic  feet  per  second  until  the  Lower  Kings  River  Ditch  Company  is  supplied  with 
100  cubic  feet  per  second.  Appealed  and  judgment  affirmed. 

July  21,  1885,  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  obtained  a  judgment 
against  the  Fowler  Switch  Company  decreeing  that  the  canal  company  be  forever 
enjoined  from  diverting  any  water  from  Kings  River  and  from  obstructing  or  in 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    KBOM    KINGS    EIVER.  279 

iinv  manner  interfering  with  the  full  flow  of  the  waters  of  the  river.     Appealed  and 
judgment  affirmed. 

September  12,  1885,  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  obtained  a 
decree  of  court  against  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch  Company  for 
$1,000,  and  requiring  it  to  remove  dam.s  and  other  obstructions  from  Kings  River, 
and  enjoining  it  from  diverting  any  water  from  the  river.  Appealed  and  appeal 
dismissed  by  the  supreme  court. 

November  5,  1885,  the  owners  of  the  Lagunade  Tache  Rancho  obtained  a  decree 
of  court  against  the  Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal  Company  requiring  it  to  close  its 
ditch  and  enjoining  it  from  taking  water.  Affirmed  by  supreme  court. 

May  3,  1886,  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  obtained  an  injunction 
restraining  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  from  dredging  out  and  enlarging 
the  lower  channel  of  Kings  River  at  and  immediately  below  Cole  Slough,  and  from 
erecting  and  maintaining  any  dam  or  obstruction  across  the  channel  of  Cole  Slough, 
or  from  doing  anything  that  would  interfere  with  the  free  flow  of  water  in  Cole 
Slough. 

October  4,  1897,  in  an  action  entitled  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Com- 
pany v.  The  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company,  it  was  decreed  that  the  Laguna  de 
Tache  Rancho  is  entitled  to  divert  30  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  before  any  of 
the  parties  to  this  action  are  entitled  to  pny  water. 

November  4, 1889,  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  obtained  a  decree 
enjoining  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  from  diverting  from  Kings  River  any  of 
the  water  of  said  river  for  sale  and  for  distribution  and  use  upon  any  lands  whatever, 
except  such  as  are  riparian  lands,  on  said  river  in  Fresno  County.  (Lands  are 
described.)  Appealed  and  judgment  affirmed  by  the  supreme  court. 

January  8,  1900,  Alta  Irrigation  District  was  declared  entitled  to  divert  500 
cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  subject  to  a  prior  right  of  Fresno  Canal  to  1,000 
cubic  feet  per  second,  excepting  in  the  months  of  October  and  November,  in  addition 
to  a  certain  quantity  which  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  may  be  obliged 
to  permit  to  flow  down  the  river  for  use  of  the  Peoples  Ditch  Company. 

September  19,  1893,  a  judgment  was  entered  against  the  76  Land  and  Water 
Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District)  decreeing  to  the  Peoples  Ditch  Canal  a  priority 
of  right  to  200  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  from  Kings  River,  and  awarding  the 
Peoples  Ditch  Company  a  judgment  for  $11,869  and  costs.  Affirmed  by  the  supreme 
court. 

May  9,  1900,  a  judgment  was  entered  by  stipulation,  according  to  which  it  was 
decreed  that  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  has  a  right  prior  to  any  of  the 
76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District)  to  217  cubic  feet  of  water  per 
second  from  Kings  River,  except  during  the  months  of  September  and  October  of 
each  year;  and  further  decreeing  that  after  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company 
is  supplied  with  this  water,  measured  in  the  SE.  i  of  sec.  30,  T.  16  S.,  R.  23  E.,  that 
subject  to  this  right  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District)  is 
entitled  to  750  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Based  on  a  complaint  dated  July  20,  1898,  a  judgment  is  entered  by  agreement 
between  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District)  and  the  Lower 
Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company,  according  to  which  it  is  decreed  that  the  Lower 


280  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company  has  a  prior  right  to  182  cubic  feet  of  water  per 
second  from  Kings  River,  and  that  subject  to  this  right  the  76  Canal  is  entitled  to 
750  cubic  feet  per  second. 

September  19,  1893,  a  judgment  was  entered  decreeing  a  priority  of  right  to  200 
cubic  feet  per  second  to  the  Peoples  Ditch  Company  as  against  the  claims  of  the  7»i 
Land  and  Water  Company  and  the  Alta  Irrigation  District,  also  giving  judgments 
against  the  70  Land  and  Water  Company  and  the  Alta  Irrigation  District  for  $11,869 
and  costs.  Affirmed  by  supreme  court. 

July  23,  1895,  a  judgment  was  entered,  based  on  an  agreement  or  stipulation, 
according  to  which  a  priority  of  right  to  a  certain  amount  of  water — 25  to  100  cubic 
feet  per  second  (not  intelligible  in  the  abstract  at  command) — is  conceded  by  the 
Peoples  Ditch  Company  to  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company. 

October  4,  1897,  a  decree  was  entered  declaring  the  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Com- 
pany entitled  to  200  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  a  prior  right  of  the  Laguna  do 
Tache  Rancho  to  30  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  of  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch 
Company  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second. 

May  15,  1899,  the  Peoples  Ditch  Companj'  obtained  judgment  against  the 
owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho,  who  endeavored  to  prevent  the  taking  of 
water  by  the  canal,  and  for  450  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  Affirmed  by  supreme 
court  November  10,  1893. 

February  25,  1900,  the  Peoples  Ditch  Company  is  decreed  to  have  a  right  to  274 
cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  prior  and  superior  to  the  right  of  the  Arkansas  Flat 
people  to  divert  19  cubic  feet  per  second  through  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg 
Canal,  and  prior  to  the  right  of  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch 
Company  to  divert  600  cubic  feet  per  second.  On  appeal. 

May  3,  1886,  a  judgment  was  entered  enjoining  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch 
Company  from  placing  or  maintaining  a  dam  or  in  any  wise  obstructing  the  full  flow 
of  water  in  the  head  of  Cole  Slough,  and  from  enlarging  the  channel  of  Lower  Kings 
River  at  the  head  of  Cole  Slough. 

March  6,  1892,  a  judgment  was  entered  declaring  the  Last  Chance  Canal  to  be 
entitled  to  190  cubic  feet  per  second,  subject  to  the  prior  right  of  the  Fresno  Canal 
and  Irrigation  Company  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second.  Appealed  and  appeal 
dismissed. 

April  13,  1897,  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  is  adjudged  to  be  the 
owner  of  250  cubic  feet  of  water.  (Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  v.  The 
Upper  Leinberger  Slough  Company  et  al.) 

October  5,  1897,  a  decree  was  entered  declaring  that  when  the  quantity  of  water 
flowing  in  the  river  is  in  excess  of  300  cubic  feet  per  second,  the  Last  Chance  Water 
Ditch  Company  is  entitled,  at  all  times,  as  against  the  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company 
and  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company,  to  divert  into  its  canal  all  of 
such  excess,  less  a  pro  rata  contribution  toward  30  cubic  feet  per  second,  to  which 
the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  is  given  a  prior  right,  until  the  excess  equals  100  cubic 
feet  per  second. 

February  25,  1900,  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  was  decreed  to  have 
a  right  to  217  cubic  feet  per  second  prior  and  superior  to  19  cubic  feet  per  second 
which  the  Arkansas  Flat  people  may  divert  through  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg 


WATKR    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  281 

C;m;il  and  prior  to  the  right  of  tlie  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch 
Company  to  (JOO  cubic-  feet  per  second.  On  appeal. 

May  9.  1900,  a  judgment,  based  on  agreement  between  the  Last  Chance  Water 
Ditch  Company  and  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Altn  Irrigation  District), 
decrees  to  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company  the  priority  of  right  to  217  cubic 
feet  of  tlic  water  per  second  from  Kings  River;  subject  to  this  prior  right  it  was 
decreed  that  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District)  is  entitled  to 
750  cubic  feet  per  second. 

April  17,  1885,  a  judgment  was  entered  denying  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de 
Tache  liancho  the  right  to  divert  more  than  30  cubic;  feet  of  water  per  second  from 
Kings  River  or  Cole  Slough  until  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company  is 
first  supplied  with  100  cubic  feet  per  second. 

March  16,  1892,  a  judgment  was  entered  declaring  the  Lower  Kings  River  Canal 
entitled  to  159  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  subject  to  a  prior  right  of  the  Fresno 
Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second.  Appealed  and  appeal 
dismissed. 

July  23,  1895,  a  judgment  was  entered  on  the  basis  of  an  agreement  or  stipula- 
tion with  the  Peoples  Ditch  Company,  according  to  which  priority  of  right  to  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  water — 25  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second  (not  intelligible  from  the 
abstract  at  command) — is  conceded  to  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company. 

October  4,  1897,  a  court  decree  was  entered  declaring  the  Lower  Kings  River 
Water  Ditch  Company  to  be  entitled  (subject  to  a  prior  right  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache 
Rancho  to  30  cubic  feet  per  second)  to  100  cubic  feet  per  second,  as  against  any 
claim  to  water  by  the  Peoples  Water  Ditch  Company  and  the  Last  Chance  Water 
Ditch  Company. 

February  25,  1900,  the  Lower  Kings  River  Ditch  Company  is  decreed  to  have  a 
right  to  182  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  prior  and  superior  to  the  right  of  the 
Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Irrigation  Ditch  Company  to  19  cubic  feet  per  second, 
and  to  600  cubic  feet  per  second  (the  19  cubic  feet  per  second  belonging  to  the 
Arkansas  Flat  people).  On  appeal. 

Based  on  an  action  commenced  July  20,  1898,  a  judgment  was  entered  by  agree- 
ment with  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District),  according  to 
which  a  prior  right  to  182  cubic  feet  of  water  per  -second  from  Kings  River  was 
decreed  to  the  Lower  Kings  River  Water  Ditch  Company,  and  subject  to  this  right 
'  it  was  decreed  that  the  76  Land  and  Water  Company  (Alta  Irrigation  District)  is 
entitled  to  750  cubic  feet  per  second. 

June  4,  1898,  by  stipulation  of  the  Crescent  Canal  Company  with  the  Stimson 
Canal  Company,  a  judgment  was  entered  by  the  court  that  the  Cresent  Canal  should 
have  the  first  right  to  213  feet  of  water  for  each  foot,  50  inches  of  water  flowing  and 
measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure. 

June  4,  1898,  by  stipulation  of  the  Stimson  Canal  Company  with  the  Crescent 
Canal  Company,  a  judgment  was  entered  by  the  court  allowing  the  Stimson  Canal 
Company  to  construct  a  headgate  in  a  dam  or  levee  at  or  near  the  North  Fork  of 
Kings  River,  but  not  to  deprive  the  Crescent  Canal  from  first  taking  the  quantity  of 
water  which  it  has  been  accustomed  to  take,  to  wit,  213  feet  for  each  foot,  50  inches 
of  water  flowing  and  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure. 


282  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

In  the  actions  A.  Heilbron  et  al.  v.  Peoples  Ditch  Company,  1883;  A.  Heilbron 
et  al.  v.  Last  Chance  Ditch  Compare,  1883,  and  A.  Heilbron  et  al.  v.  Emigrant  Ditch 
Company,  1883,  it  was  decreed  that  the  causes  of  action  were  barred  by  the  statute 
of  limitations.  A.  Heilbron  et  al.  were  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho. 

The  decisions  above  quoted  do  not  represent  all  the  litigation  between  the  appro- 
priators  of  water  from  Kings  River,  as  numerous  cases  were  of  minor  importance, 
or  decisions  were  reversed,  or  had  no  bearing  upon  the  right  of  the  canals  to  water, 
or  are  still  pending. 

A  lack  of  consistency  in  these  court  decrees  is  apparent.  In  cases  where  appro- 
priators  of  water  have  not  acquired  rights  by  the  statute  of  limitations  the  ripa- 
rian owners  seem  to  be  successful  in  obtaining  decrees  restraining  appropriators  from 
diverting  the  waters  of  the  stream,  even  when  the  riparian  owners  are  themselves 
diverting  the  water  from  natural  channels  in  order  to  make  it  accomplish  a  greater 
duty  in  watering  crops  than  it  could  accomplish  if  left  to  flow  undisturbed  in  natural 
channels.  But  after  decrees  are  entered  and  confirmed,  enjoining  canal  owners  from 
taking  water,  they  are  followed  by  other  decrees  apparently  conceding  water  to  the 
same  canals  and  fixing  the  priority  of  use  as  between  the  several  canals. 

These  decisions  are  rendered  at  the  close  of  long  and  expensive  trials.  The  facts 
relating  to  canal  construction,  to  canal  dimensions  and  capacity,  and  to  periodical 
enlargements  are  not  of  record,  and  the  courts  are  not  provided  with  impartial  tech- 
nical aid  to  ascertain  or  verify  facts  which  are  presented  by  the  host  of  witnesses 
marshaled  by  plaintiff  and  defendant.  Even  the  experts  do  not  agree,  and  in  many 
cases  the  best  expert  testimony  is  outweighed  by  evidence  erroneously  classed  as 
expert.  The  expert,  moreover,  is  generally  not  called  until  the  cause  of  action  has 
been  clearly  defined,  and  he  must  deal  with  facts  as  he  then  finds  them.  He  is  rarely 
in  a  position  to  follow  up  the  full  history  of  canal  building,  so  as  to  present  a  correct 
sequence  of  such  facts  as  are  essential  in  passing  upon  the  merits  of  rival  claims  to 
water. 

KINGS  RIVER  CANALS. 

The  first  irrigators  using  Kings  River  water  were  some  of  the  settlers  on  the 
Centerville  Bottoms — Hiram  Dennis,  Harvey  Akers,  Jesse  Morrow,  John  Carey,  and 
others,  who  severally,  and  occasionally  in  partnership,  constructed  small  ditches  for 
the  irrigation  of  favorably  located  tracts  of  land.  Most  of  these  early  works  were 
badly  wrecked  by  the  great  floods  of  1867-68,  and  it  has  been  found  difficult  to  trace 
the  history  of  these  earliest  ditches,  many  of  which  have  been  out  of  service  most  or 
all  of  the  time  since  then.  The  most  permanent  in  character  seems  to  have  been  the 
Centerville  Canal  or  Ditch,  for  the  enlargement  of  which  J.  B.  Sweem  tiled  a  notice  of 
a  claim  to  water  August  5,  1869.  The  Sweem  water  right  and  the  Centerville  Ditch 
both  passed  soon  after  into  the  hands  of  M.  J.  Church,  the  projector  of  the  Fresno 
Canal. 

SAN  JOAOCTIN  AND  KINGS  RIVER  CANAL. 

The  most  comprehensive  project  for  the  utilization  of  Kings  River  water  of  the 
early  days  of  irrigation  development  in  this  region  was  that  of  the  San  Joaquin  and 
Kings  River  Canal  Company,  which  proposed  not  only  to  divert  San  Joaquin  River 
water  upon  the  west-side  plain  of  the  valley,  a  project  which  has  been  carried  out, 


U.  S-  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations       Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXV. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  283 

but  who  were  far-seeing  enough  to  recognize  the  value  to  their  enterprise  of  controll- 
ing also  the  water  to  Kings  River  and  other  -streams  to  the  -south  as  well  as  the  over- 
flow of  Tulare  Lake.  Their  project  was  on  too  stupendous  a  scale  to  be  carried  out 
in  its  entiret3'  with  the  means  at  command,  but  it  indicates  that  the  value  of  effecting 
a  control  of  the  water  available  for  irrigation  was  early  appreciated.  From  the 
notices  recorded  it  is  inferred  that  they  claimed  the  first  right  to  water  running  in 
Kings  River.  The  records  also  indicate  their  intent  to  dam  up  Lake  Tulare,  using  the 
same  as  a  reservoir  and  availing  themselves  of  the  flow  of  Kings  River  sloughs,  the 
Mussel  Slough,  Four  Creeks,  Deer  and  Elk  creeks,  Bayou  River,  Tule  River,  White 
River,  Poso  Creek,  Kern  River.  Kern  River  sloughs,  Goose  Lake,  Buena  Vista  and 
Kern  lakes,  and  Buena  Vista  Slough.  It  was  also  proposed  by  the  same  company  to 
utilize  by  appropriation  the  waters  of  Summit  Lake  and  its  tributaries;  also  to  con- 
vert a  15-mile  -stretch  of  Kings  River,  near  the  point  where  it  leaves  the  foothills, 
into  a  reservoir  for  storage  purposes.  As  ultimately  constructed,  the  canal  of  the  San 
Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  Company  received  its  supply  of  water  from  San 
Joaquin  River  at  the  point  where  the  same  is  joined  by  Fresno  Slough.  Kings  River 
contributes  to  the  supply  of  the  canal  but  little  water — only  that  which  through 
north-side  delta  channels  reaches  Fresno  Swamp,  and  succeeds  in  passing  the  num- 
erous north-side  Kings  River  irrigation  canals,  and  even  this  water,  as  it  flows  only 
at  times  when  the  San  Joaquin  River  is  furnishing  an  abundant  supply,  can  hardly 
be  construed  as  being  an  important  contribution  to  the  water  taken  by  that  canal. 

The  idea  of  utilizing  Tulare  Lake  as  a  storage  reservoir  for  irrigation  purposes 
was  revived  a  few  years  later,  when  the  legislature  passed  an  act  authorizing  the 
formation  of  a  west-side  irrigation  district.  The  studies  for  this  district  relating  to 
water  supply  and  canal  system  were  made  and  all  preliminary  steps  for  its  organiza- 
tion were  taken.  The  bonds  authorized,  however,  were  never  sold,  and  no  district 
works  were  constructed. 

SANGER  FI/rjME. 

Sanger  Flume  and  Lumber  Company  uses  a  certain  amount  of  Kings  River 
water,  diverted  from  the  stream  far  up  the  mountains,  to  float  its  lumber  to  a  delivery 
at  Sanger,  about  14  miles  east  of  Fresno.  The  water  of  the  flume — about  15  to  20 
cubic  feet  per  second — is,  by  agreement  with  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Com- 
pany, turned  into  the  Lone  Tree  Channel,  one  of  the  branches  of  the  Fresno  Canal. 

DITCHES  OP  CENTERVILLE  BOTTOMS. 

Earliest  among  the  users  of  Kings  River  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation  were 
the  settlers  in  the  Centerville  Bottoms.  The  bottom  lands  were  naturally  well,  and 
frequently  excessively,  watered  by  the  network  of  high  and  low  water  channels  in 
which  the  river  flows  through  the  bottoms  and  to  a  final  concentration  in  a  single 
channel  near  the  lower  end  of  the  bottoms  at  the  Narrows.  Control  of  water  in  these 
channels  and  its  diversion  were  readily  effected.  A  few  cobbles  piled  into  a  channel 
to  increase  the  flow  in  another,  even  a  high-water  slough,  has  frequently  been  the 
basis  for  thereafter  claiming  it  as  a  ditch  or  canal.  Some  of  the  ditches  now  in  use 
in  the  Centerville  Bottoms  are  of  recent  construction.  In  the  case  of  some  of  these 
newer  canals,  their  owners,  claiming  that  they  were  constructed  for  the  benefit  of  the 


284  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

.same  lands  that  were  formerly  watered  by  some  of  the  old  ditches,  construe  them  as 
entitling  the  present  owners  to  the  original  rights,  in  some  cases  even  when,  after 
the  great  freshet  of  1867-68,  years  of  disuse  have  intervened. 


RICE    DITCH. 


This  is  an  old  ditch  which  has  its  head  at  the  dam  of  the  Centerville  and  Kings- 
burg  Canal.  Its  water  is  supplied  through  a  culvert  in  the  westerly  end  of  the  dam. 
The  ditch  has  a  width  of  about  10  feet,  having  a  capacity  of  10  to  20  cubic  feet  per 
second.  The  ditch  has  a  length  of  about  2  miles. 


JACOBIE    DITCH. 

This  is  a  small  ditch,  less  than  a  mile  in  length,  on  the  south  side  of  the  main 
channel  of  Kings  River,  about  a  mile  below  the  head  of  the  Centerville  and  Kings- 
burg  Canal.  It  was  built  within  the  last  few  years,  has  a  width  of  about  3  feet,  and 
supplies  water  to  about  200  acres  of  land. 

THE    DUNNIGAN-BYRD    DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  built  in  1892  and  receives  water  from  one  of  the  high-water 
channels  of  Kings  River  which  connects  Moody  Slough  with  Patterson  Slough.  The 
ditch  is  about  2  miles  long  and  about  3  feet  wide,  and  has  a  capacity  of  about  5  cubic 
feet  per  second.  A  small  cobble  dam  is  maintained  in  the  channel,  from  which  it 
diverts  water.  The  lands  served  by  it  have  an  area  of  about  300  acres. 

HANKE    DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  constructed  in  1895  to  irrigate  lands  previously  watered  by  the 
old  Barton  Ditch,  the  headgate  of  which  was  washed  out  in  1867-68.  The  ditch 
receives  water  from  the  south  bank  of  Moody  Slough,  which  is  one  of  the  channels 
of  Kings  River.  The  ditch  headgate  is  located  somewhat  farther  downstream  than 
the  original  headgate  of  the  Barton  Ditch.  The  ditch  is  about  12  feet  wide,  carrying 
about  25  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  with  a  possible  extreme  capacity  of  twice 
this  amount.  It  is  the  largest  of  the  ditches  irrigating  lands  in  the  Centerville 
Bottoms.  The  lands  served  by  it  have  an  area  of  about  1,200  acres. 

CAMERON    DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  constructed  about  1885.  It  receives  its  water  from  the  west  side 
of  Patterson  Slough  and  occupies  a  position  nearly  parallel  with  the  Hanke  Ditch, 
but  from  one-fourth  to  one  half  mile  farther  east.  It  has  a  width  of  about  6  feet 
and  carries  about  10  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  Its  owners  claim  that  its  right 
to  take  water  dates  back  to  1865,  when  Hiram  Dennis  filed  a  notice  of  intention  to 
construct  a  ditch  20  feet  wide.  It  has  a  southwesterly  direction,  is  a  little  over  a 
mile  long,  and  supplies  water  to  about  300  acres  of  land.  A  brush  dam  is  maintained 
in  Patterson  Slough  at  its  head  to  assist  in  the  diversion  of  water. 

DENNIS   DITCH. 

This  ditch  is  reported  to  have  been  built  in  1859.  It  takes  water  from  the  west 
side  of  a  high-water  channel  vvhich  leaves  Patterson  Slough  near  the  head  of  the 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    KIVKR.  285 

Cameron  Ditch  and  connects  Patterson  Slough  with  Outside  Slough.  A  brush  dam  is 
maintained  in  Patterson  Slough  to  divert  water  into  the  high-water  channel,  and  a 
smaller  dam  in  this  channel — which  is  about  10  feet  wide — turns  the  water  into  the 
ditch.  Dennis  Ditch  has  a  width  of  about  5  feet  and  a  flow  of  from  5  to  10  cubic  feet 
per  second.  It  has  a  southerly  direction,  is  about  3  miles  long,  and  supplies  water 
to  about  300  acres  of  land. 

BYRD   DITCH. 

This  ditch  is  reported  to  have  been  constructed  in  1858.  It  receives  its  water 
from  the  same  channel  that  supplies  water  to  the  Dennis  Ditch,  having  its  head 
about  half  a  mile  below  the  head  of  the  latter.  The  original  diverting  works  were 
destroyed  by  the  freshet  of  1867-68,  and  the  ditch  fell  into  disuse.  It  has  been  in 
service  again  since  1885.  Its  capacity  is  about  5  to  7  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second. 
It  has  a  width  of  about  5  feet,  flowing  in  a  southerly  direction  for  about  3  miles, 
paralleling  the  Dennis  Ditch  and  irrigating  about  300  acres. 

THE    NEW   JACK    DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  built  in  1898,  receiving  its  water  from  Outside  Channel  about  4 
miles  below  the  point  where  Outside  Channel  separates  from  Patterson  Slough.  It 
is  a  short,  small  ditch,  about  3  feet  wide  and  1  mile  long,  irrigating  about  160  acres 
of  land  lying  between  two  of  the  branches  of  Outside  Channel. 

MITCHELL    DITCH. 

This  is  a  small  ditch.  It  receives  water  from  a  branch  of  Outside  Slough  and 
serves  a  few  acres  of  land  in  the  same  vicinity  as  that  served  by  the  Jack  Ditch. 
The  width  of  the  ditch  is  about  3  feet  and  its  length  about  1  mile. 

FINK   CHANNEL. 

By  this  name  the  eastern  arm  of  Outside  Slough  is  known.  Its  course  is  almost 
due  south  for  a  distance  of  5  miles,  near  the  eastern  limit  of  the  Centerville  Bottoms. 
The  water  was  first  diverted  from  Outside  Channel  at  the  head  of  this  water  course 
in  1868.  A  brush  dam  in  one  of  the  several  channels  into  which  Outside  Channel 
separates  at  the  head  of  this  water  course  turns  the  water  into  it.  The  inflow  into 
Fink  Channel  is  controlled  by  a  headgate  12  feet  in  width.  This  gate  is  of  recent 
construction.  Fink  Channel  is  about  20  feet  wide,  and  carries  from  25  to  30  cubic 
feet  of  water  per  second.  It  supplies  the  Jack  Ditch,  Fink  Ditch,  and  a  number  of 
other  small  ditches  with  water.  This  channel  was  formerly  known  as  the  Kincaid 
Ditch.  About  1,000  acres  are  reported  as  being  served  with  the  water  of  this 
channel. 

JACK   DITCH. 

This  is  a  ditch  supplied  with  water  from  Outside  Channel  through  the  Fink 
Channel.  Its  head  is  about  2  miles  below  the  point  where  Outside  Channel  sepa- 
rates from  Patterson  Slough  on  the  easterly  side  of  Fink  Channel.  The  ditch  has  a 
southwesterly,  then  southerly,  course,  being  a  little  over  2  miles  long.  Its  bed  width 
is  about  5  feet. 


286  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

FINK   DITCH. 

N 

This  is  another  one  of  the  small  ditches  to  which  water  i.s  supplied  through  Fink 
Channel.  It  receives  its  water  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  channel,  about  a  mile  below 
the  head  of  the  Jack  Ditch.  It  has  a  southerly  course  and  is  about  2  miles  long. 

KINGS  RIVER  AND   FRESNO   CANAL. 

This  canal  is  reported  to  be  now  owned  by  the  same  parties  who  own  the  Fresno 
Canal.  It  is  probable  that  decisions  of  the  courts  adverse  to  the  claims  of  its  original 
owners  have  forced  a  combination  with  what  was  originally  a  rival  enterprise.  As 
elsewhere  noted,  the  canal  company  is  enjoined  from  taking  any  water  from  Kings 
River,  but  still  remains  in  service.  The  canal  is  favorably  located  for  effecting 
diversion,  and  it  commands  that  portion  of  the  great  east-side  plain  of  the  San  Joa- 
quin  Valley  which  extends  from  Kings  River  northward  to  the  San  Joaquin  River. 
This  canal  is  the  upper  north-side  canal  from  Kings  River,  the  point  of  diversion 
being  about  6  miles  above  Centerville  (now  Kings  River).  Its  water  is  carried  into 
the  region  northeasterly  from  Fresno,  serving  lands  westward  from  the  base  of  the 
foothills  for  a  distance  of  about  20  miles.  The  bed  width  of  the  canal  is  generally  16 
to  24  feet.  The  flumes  in  which  it  is  carried  over  Red  Bank  and  other  creeks  are  16 


feet  wide,  with  sides  :>>  feet  high.  The  capacity  of  the  canal  is  about,  3<t<»  cubic  feet 
per  second.  By  a  gaging  made  this  year  at  a  time  when  the  canal  was  being  filled 
with  water  its  flow  was  found  to  be  260  cubic  feet  per  second.  As  the  water  was 
probably  still  rising  while  this  gaging  was  being  made,  it  is  not  a  perfectly  reliable 
index  of  canal  capacity. 

The  canal  is  owned  by  an  incorporated  company,  and  its  water  is  sold  at  rates 
fixed  annually.  Owners  of  stock  are  preferred  purchasers  of  the  water,  and  receive 
the  same  at  two-thirds  its  cost  to  other  irrigators.  The  rates  in  the  past  have  been 
$50  per  cubic  foot  per  second  to  stockholders  and  $75  per  cubic  foot  per  second  to 
others.  No  attempt  is  made  to  measure  the  water  delivered  to  consumers.  The 
canal  superintendent  apportions  it  to  the  latter  and  private  ditches  according  to  the 
number  of  cubic  feet  per  second  to  which  each  is  entitled. 

The  canal  construction  dates  back  to  1872,  and  the  first  cost  of  the  main  canal  is 
reported  to  have  been  $50,000.  The  area  irrigated,  or  sufficiently  benefited  by  the 
waters  of  the  canal  to  be  classed  as  irrigated,  has  been  reported  at  about  15,000 
acres. 

FRESNO  CANAL. 

The  construction  of  the  Fresno  Canal  antedates  that  of  the  Kings  River  and 
Fresno  Canal  about  two  years.  This  canal  supplies  water  to  the  irrigated  region 
in  which  Fresno  is  centrally  located.  The  head  of  the  canal  is  about  4  miles  above 
Centerville,  near  the  northern  margin  of  Centerville  Bottoms.  (Fig.  13  A.)  It 
receives  water  from  the  Centerville  channel  of  Kings  River,  across  which  a  cobblestone 
and  brush  dam  is  maintained.  A  short  westerly  cut  through  the  gravelly  soil  of  the 
bottoms  takes  the  canal  to  a  depression  at  the  base  of  the  north-side  bluff,  which 
depression  was  formerly  known  as  Chambers  Slough.  This  has  been  converted 
into  a  canal  section  by  the  construction  of  a  levee  along  its  south  bank  to  a  point  a 
little  over  a  mile  from  the  head  of  the  canal.  The  canal  capacity  is,  and  has  been 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    KIVER. 


287 


in  the  past,  in  a  large  measure  dependent  upon  the  safe  height  to  which  this  embank- 
ment along  Chambers  Slough  permitted  water  to  be  raised.  Leaving  Chambers 
Slough  the  canal  is  cut  into  the  higher  bank  land  and  lies  in  an  excavation  having 
a  greatest,  depth  of  about  10  feet  and  a  bed  width  of  about  50  feet.  The  main 
canal  in  its  course  thence  westerly  toward  Fresno  holds  a  direction  probably  with 
the  greatest  slope  of  the  country,  falling  5  to  10  feet  per  mile.  Advantage  was  taken 
of  a  number  of  natural  water  courses,  into  which  the  canal  water  was  dropped. 
Canal  construction  commenced  in  1870  with  the  posting  of  a  notice  of  a  claim  to 
water  "to  be  taken  from  Kings  River  at  the  upper  end  of  Sweem  Ditch,  20  feet 
on  the  bottom,  30  feet  on  top,  4  feet  deep."  This  claim  was  made  by  Mr.  M.  J. 
Church,  who  a  month  later  acquired  a  two-thirds  interest  in  the  Swcem  Ditch.  The 


HEADWORKS 

OF 

A   FRESNO  AND  FOWLER  SWITCH  CANALS 
B    CENTERVILLE  AND  KINGSBURG  CANAL 


SCALE    IN    FEET 


1000 


Cente 


FIG.  13.— A,  headworks  of  Fresno  and  Fowler  Switch  canals;  B,  headworks  of  Centeiville  and  Kingsburg  Canal. 

Sweem  Ditch  was  a  small  ditch,  the  construction  of  which  seems  to  have  been 
commenced  in  1870,  and  it  was  intended  to  increase  the  flow  of  what  was  then  known 
as  the  Centerville  Ditch.  Its  upper  section  was  enlarged  and  became  the  head 
section  of  Fresno  Canal.  In  1872  a  regulator,  or  headgate,  was  constructed  in  the 
head  of  Fresno  Canal,  and  in  the  spring  of  1874  a  small  cut  on  the  line  of  the  present 
Long  Cut  was  completed  from  the  Centerville  Ditch  to  the  lower  sections  of  the 
Fresno  Canal,  on  which  work  had  meanwhile  been  pushed  to  the  limit  of  the  means 
of  the  projector  of  the  work.  This  small  connecting  ditch  is  reported  to  have  had 
a  bed  width  of  only  5  feet  on  a  grade  of  5  feet  to  the  mile.  As  the  alignment  of 
a  part  of  the  older  Centerville  Ditch  was  in  time  to  become  the  alignment  of  a  section 
of  the  Fresno  Canal,  and  because  it  seemed  desirable  to  secure  the  water  rights 


288  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

acquired  by  the  Centerville  people,  arrangements  were  made  to  obtain  control 
of  the  corporation  known  as  the  Centerville  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  and  a 
transfer  of  their  ditch  property  was  made  to  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation 
Company.  This  was  in  1874.  As  soon,  however,  as  the  settlers  near  Centerville 
realized  what  their  officers  were  doing  the  demands  for  just  treatment  at  the  hands 
of  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company  were  made  so  emphatic  that  those,  who 
were  entitled  to  water  in  the  older  ditch  were  granted  water  rights  in  the  new  canal 
for  their  lands  in  perpetuity,  without  limit  as  to  quantity  and  free  from  expense 
assessments.  About  1,500  to  2,000  acres  of  land  are  thus  covered.  In  1875  it  became 
necessary  to  enlarge  the  cut  westward  from  the  Centerville  Ditch,  and  to  this  end 
labor  was  bargained  for  with  farmers  who  wanted  water  delivered  to  their  lands 
through  Lone  Tree  Creek.  Thirty-five  water  rights  were  issued  to  farmers,  who 
completed  this  canal  section  in  June,  1875.  Meanwhile  other  parties  had  become 
financially  interested  in  the  enterprise.  It  was  not  profitable,  however,  at  the  outset, 
and,  from  various  causes,  a  transfer  of  the  property  in  1876  to  the  Bank  of  Nevada 
became  necessary.  The  bank  soon  sold  it  to  the  original  projector,  on  the  execution 
by  him  of  a  long-term  note,  for  $28,000.  By  this  time  a  number  of  large  holdings  of 
land  had  been  subdivided  and  sold  in  small  tracts  and  had  become  dependent  upon 
the  canal  for  water.  Notable  among  these  early  colonies  are  Central  Colony,  owning 
2,640  acres,  and  Temperance,  Church,  and  Nevada  colonies,  each  owning  (540  acres. 
These  colonies,  together  with  the  Pioneer  Vineyard  on  the  F.  T.  Eisen  tract,  soon 
demonstrated  the  great  productiveness  of  the  Fresno  sand  plains,  and  the  development 
of  that  region  was  rapid  during  the  next  decade.  The  sale  of  water  rights  had 
progressed  steadily,  so  that  in  1884  about  4uu  had  been  issued  or  bargained  for,  and 
their  price  had  increased  from  $200  to  $800  each.  Later  their  price  was  fixed  at 
$1,600  by  the  canal  management. 

A  water  right,  as  issued  by  the  company,  is  the  right  to  use  one-thousandth  part 
of  the  flow  of  the  canal  not  in  excess  of  1  cubic  foot  per  second  on  a  specified  tract  of 
160  acres.  The  canal  company  reserves  the  privilege  of  issuing  1,000  water  rights 
without  enlarging  the  main  canal.  Each  purchaser  of  a  water  right  agrees  not  to 
use  the  water  or  permit  it  to  be  used  on  any  other  land  than  that  for  which  the  right 
is  purchased,  nor  to  permit  the  water  to  run  off  upon  contiguous  land,  or  in  any  other 
way  to  run  to  useless  waste,  and  he  agrees  to  return  surplus  waters  to  the  main  canal 
or  a  branch  thereof.  Each  water  right  remains  subject  to  an  annual  expense  assess- 
ment, which  ranges  from  $80  to  $100.  Water  is  delivered  without  any  attempt  at 
measurement  to  each  irrigator  at  any  point  on  the  company's  ditch  system  that  he 
may  select.  No  transfer  of  a  water  right  can  be  made  except  with  the  land  which  it 
covers.  Each  purchaser  of  a  water  right  grants  to  the  canal  company  the  right  of 
way  for  ditch  and  canal  purposes  through  any  lands  lying  in  the  same  township  as  the 
tract  for  which  water  is  bought,  and  concedes  to  the  company  the  right  to  use  his 
private  ditch  provided  the  company  does  not  use  it  so  as  to  interfere  with  the  delivery 
of  his  water.  The  purchaser  of  a  water  right  further  obligates  himself  to  pay  to  the 
canal  company  annually  an  agreed  sum  (this  has  usually  been  $100),  and  in  default  of 
payment  for  thirty  days  to  forfeit  his  water  right.  The  water-right  agreement 
further  sets  forth  that  the  company  shall  not  be  responsible  for  deficiency  in  water 
supply  caused  by  drought,  insufficiency  of  water  in  the  river,  hostile  diversion  or 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    KKOM    KINGS    RIVKR.  289 

obstruction,  forcible  measures,  or  temporary  damage  by  floods  or  other  accidents,  but 
that  it  shall  use  and  employ  all  due  diligence  at  all  times  in  restoring  and  protecting 
the  flow  of  water  in  its  canals. 

The  structures  on  the  canal  do  not  deserve  extended  notice.  They  are  all  made 
of  timber.  The,  original  regulator  has  been  replaced  by  a  second  one,  constructed 
about  1  ss-k  It  consists  of  a  substantial  framework  of  heavy  timbers,  spaces  between 
vertical  posts  being  closed  by  vertical  sliding  gates.  From  the  headgate  an  embank- 
ment of  cobblestones,  gravel,  and  sand  extends  northward  across  Centerville  Bottoms 
to  a  connection  with  high  land,  and  prevents  destruction  of  the  upper  section  of  the 
canal  during  freshets.  The  diversion  of  water  into  the  head  of  the  canal  is  effected 
0  by  means  of  a  brush  and  cobblestone  dam,  the  maintenance  of  which  in  the  past  has 
not  been  expensive.  Along  the  line  of  the  canal,  wherever  necessary  to  prevent 
excessive  erosion  or  where  required  to  turn  water  into  a  branch  ditch,  light  timber 
weirs  are  in  use.  Most  of  these  consist  of  two  side  or  bulkhead  walls  and  a  floor, 
usually  placed  a  little  below  the  grade  of  the  canal,  and  a  line  of  vertical  posts  sup- 
ported by  braces  from  below.  Spaces  between  posts  are  closed  to  the  desired  height 
either  by  fixed  horizontal  boarding  or  by  movable  drop  timbers  or  boards.  The 
impression  which  the  whole  work  gives  is  that  of  haphazard  management,  the  result 
of  which  is  not,  however,  entirely  unsatisfactory. 

The  control  of  the  canal  long  ago  passed  out  of  the  hands  of  Mr.  Church,  who 
effected  a  profitable  sale  of  the  property.  It  is  now  managed  by  parties  who  also 
own  controlling  interests  in  Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal  Company,  and  who  have 
acquired  the  property  known  as  the  Laguna  do  Tache  Raneho. 

Since  the  construction  of  the  canal  its  capacity  to  divert  and  distribute  water 
has  gradually  been  increased.  It  was  probably  not  in  excess  of  500  cubic  feet  per 
second  in  1879,  at  which  time  approximate  gagings  were  made  by  the  State  engineer's 
department,  and  the  present  capacity  is  about  1,000  cubic  feet  per  second.  A  test  of 
the  canal  capacity  under  the  most  favorable  conditions  of  flow,  but  at  a  time  when 
the  branches  of  the  canal  were  reported  to  be  unprepared  to  receive  the  full  volume 
of  water,  was  made  in  June  of  this  year.  The  amount  of  flow  was  approximated  at 
1,100  cubic  feet  per  second.  During  this  test  the  water  surface  at  the  gaging  station 
rose  1  inch,  showing  that  the  canal  had  not  reached  a  condition  of  permanent  flow 
and  that  the  canal  and  its  branches  below  the  station  had  not  been  entirely  filled 
with  water  at  the  time  the  gaging  commenced.  The  amount  determined  by  this  test 
must,  therefore,  be  assumed  to  be  in  excess  of  actual  capacitj-.  The  area  now  cov- 
ered by  the  so-called  water  rights,  issued  by  the  canal  company,  is  about  160,000 
acres.  The  area  actually  irrigated  or  benefited  by  the  canal  water  could  not  be 
ascertained  with  precision,  but  is  thought  to  be  about  70,000  acres. 

CENTERVILLE   DITCH. 

.  This  is  at  present  a  branch  of  the  Fresno  Canal.  It  was  constructed  in  1868  and 
1869  by  settlers  near  Centerville  (now  Kings  River).  They  organized  a  company 
known  as  the  Centerville  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  which  was  incorporated  in 
August,  1868.  This  company  seems  to  have  been  the  successor  in  interest  to  all 
rights  acquired  by  some  of  the  settlers,  whose  first  steps  to  secure  water  were  taken  in 

23856— No.  100—01 19 


290  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

1865.  The  canal  was  constructed  southwesterly  from  a  point  near  where  the  head  of 
the  Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal  now-is,  about  2.5  miles,  to  Burns  Slough.  Thence 
this  slough  was  utilized  for  about  a  mile  to  a  point  a  short  distance  below  the  Long 
Cut,  and  thence  the  ditch  was  extended  southwesterly  about  3  miles  farther  to  lands 
at  and  west  of  Centerville.  The  canal  property  was  transferred  to  the  Fresno  Canal 
and  Irrigation  Company,  in  1874,  by  those  who  had  secured  control  of  the  stock, 
and  the  opposing  minority  interests  were  finally  placated  by  the  issuance  of  per- 
petual unassessable  water  rights  in  the  newer  canal  to  stockholders  who  owned 
lands  near  Centerville. 

SWEEM  DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  never  completed.  Its  construction  was  commenced  in  1870  from 
a  point  near  the  present  head  of  the  Fresno  Canal,  practically  on  the  alignment  sub- 
sequently adopted  for  that  canal.  Its  purpose  was  to  increase  the  delivery  of  water 
into  Burns  Slough  for  the  Centerville  Ditch.  It  was  sold  before  completion  to  the 
parties  who  were  at  work  on  the  Fresno  Canal  project,  and  within  a  few  years  it  was 
transformed  into  a  large  canal,  as  already  explained. 

FOWI^ER   SWITCH  CANAL. 

The  head  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal  is  in  Centerville  Bottoms,  about  100  yards 
below  the  head  of  Fresno  Canal.  (See  fig.  13  A.)  Its  course  is  southwesterly  for  1.5 
miles  in  Centerville  Bottoms,  thence  westerly  for  2  miles  across  the  second  bottoms 
to  near  the  channel  of  Lone  Tree  Creek,  thence  southwesterly  10  miles  and  southerly 
5  miles  to  a  point  about  midway  between  Fowler  and  Selma,  thence  southwesterly  5 
miles,  thence  northwesterly  into  the  district  southward  from  the  Washington  Colony. 
The  canal  is  said  to  have  been  built  to  carry  1,500  cubic  feet  per  second.  Its  bed 
width  is  about  45  feet,  its  depth  variable.  The  gradient  is  very  irregular,  being  that 
of  the  natural  surface  of  the  ground  in  its  upper  sections,  where  quite  firm  hardpan 
formation  is  relied  upon  to  check  excessive  erosion  of  the  canal  bed.  Near  the  lower 
end  of  the  canal  it  was  given  a  fall  of  1.92  feet  to  the  mile. 

It  was  proposed  to  use  no  check  weire  to  reduce  the  fall,  which  for  a  short  dis- 
tance was  as  great  as  12  feet  to  the  mile,  and  to  put  lateral  ditches  at  a  lower  elevation 
than  the  main  canal,  so  as  to  reduce  the  necessary  structures  to  a  minimum.  It  was 
soon  found,  however,  that  weirs  would  be  necessary  at  some  points  to  check  erosion 
and  at  most  points  where  water  was  to  be  diverted. 

Among  the  branches  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal  may  be  mentioned  the  Cleveland 
Ditch,  about  5  miles  long,  which  delivers  water  to  lands  midway  between  Malaga  and 
Fowler;  the  Western  Canal,  which  supplies  water  to  lands  adjacent  to  and  immedi- 
ately south  of  the  Sierra  Park  and  Washington  Colony;  the  Grant  Ditch,  which  lias 
a  westerly  course  for  4  to  5  miles  from  near  the  end  of  the  main  canal;  and  the  Elk- 
horn  Canal,  which  has  a  southwesterly  course  and  delivers  water  to  the  western  portion 
of  the  Wildflower  region.  The  entire  canal  system  gave  promise  of  being  one  of 
considerable  importance  to  the  prosperity  of  the  district  it  commanded,  but  hopes 
have  not  been  fully  realized.  The  canal  has  not  been  permitted  to  take  river  water 
without  protest,  and  unfavorable  court  decisions  have  thrown  some  doubt  upon  the 
reliability  of  this  canal  as  a  source  of  supply. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    KROM    KINGS    RIVER.  291 

This  fill  ml  was  constructed  in  1883.  Farmers  in  the  vicinity  of  Fowler  who  wanted 
water  for  their  own  lands  formed  a  corporation,  the  capital  stock  of  which  was  fixed 
at  $450,000,  divided  into  1,500  shares,  of  which  300  were  subscribed  for.  It  was 
agreed  that  in  payment  for  each  share  labor  and  material  might  be  contributed  to  the 
extent  of  $200,  the  remainder  to  be  paid  in  coin.  It  was  soon  found,  however,  that 
the  first  issue  of  shares  would  not  cover  the  cost  of  canal  construction,  and  it  was 
followed  by  a  second  issue  of  300  shares,  which  were  taken  by  the  same  persons  who 
held  the  first  issue.  About  $110,000  were  expended  on  canal  construction  in  the  first 
two  years. 

The  water  in  the  canal  is  apportioned  to  the  stockholders,  who  may  ask  for  the 
delivery  of  their  water  at  any  point  on  the  main  canal.  This  has  led  to  the  construc- 
tion of  a  number  of  branch  ditches  under  independent  management  (owned  by  the 
landowners),  which  receive  their  water  from  the  main  canal.  One  of  the  principal 
branches  of  this  sort  is  the  Elkhorn  Ditch.  It  is  owned  by  a  company  in  which  thirty 
shares  are  represented.  Some  of  the  stockholders  in  the  Elkhorn  Ditch  Company 
are  not  holders  of  Fowler  Switch  stock.  In  such  cases  the}'  are  required  to  buy 
their  water  from  some  stockholder.  The  use  of  the  Elkhorn  Ditch  is  restricted  to 
its  owners,  no  water  being  sold. 

The  water  represented  by  the  stock  of  the  iowler  Switch  Canal  Company  is  at 
the  disposal  of  the  individual  stockholders  to  the  extent  that  it  may  ..be  leased  or  sold 
and  its  delivery  ma}-  be  called  for  through  any  branch  ditch.  No  system  of  water 
measurement  or  special  design  of  gate  has  been  prescribed.  All  gates  in  distributing 
ditches  are  constructed  by  the  consumers.  The  delivery  of  water  through  these  gates 
is  in  charge  of  a  canal  superintendent.  The  canal  company  itself  does  not  sell  any 
water.  All  expenses  are  met  by  assessing  the  stockholders. 

The  structures  on  the  canal  do  not  merit  extended  notice.  They  are  all  of  very 
light  construction.  The  check  weirs  or  drops  are  A-shaped,  upper  and  lower  faces 
being  permanently  sheathed  with  light  boarding.  There  is  no  diverting  dam  at  the 
head  of  the  canal,  which  has  been  located  just  above  a  natural  cobblestone  and  bowlder 
riffle. 

Within  the  last  few  years  the  canal  company  has  adopted  the  policy  of  selling 
water,  the  charge  for  the  same  being  75  cents  per  acre  for  each  irrigation. 

Under  the  statute  which  appeal's  to  give  an  appropriate!'  of  water  the  right  to 
change  at  will  the  points  at  which  he  diverts  water,  an  arrangement  has  been  made 
by  the  owners  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal  with  the  Emigrant  Irrigation  Ditch  Com- 
pany under  which  the  latter  is  allowed  to  take  a  part  of  the  water  to  which  it  claims 
title  through  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal.  The  water  entering  the  canal  is  apportioned 
to  the  irrigators  entitled  to  receive  water  from  either  of  the  canals.  The  area  irri- 
gated or  benefited  by  the  water  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal,  together  with  that 
served  by  the  Emigrant  Canal,  has  been  estimated  at  about  10,000  acres.  The  maxi- 
mum capacity  of  the  canal  is  about  700  cubic  feet  per  second. 

CENTEBVTIiLE  AND  KINGSBTTRG  CANAL. 

This  is  another  of  the  important  north  side  canals  from  Kings  River  belonging 
to  the  upper  group  of  canals.  Its  head  is  about  2  miles  in  a  direct  line  northeast  of 
Centerville,  and  about  the  same  distance  by  river  below  the  head  of  the  Fowler 


292  IRRIGATION    INYKSTH1ATIONS     IX    CALIFORNIA. 

Switch  Canal.  Its  course  is  westerly  for  nearly  half  :i  mile,  directly  toward  the  north- 
western margin  of  Centerville  Bottoms.  Its  second  half  mile  lias  a  southwesterly 
direction,  along  the  slope  from  the  higher  plains  to  the  bottoms:  thence  on  the  higher 
level  it  holds  a  course  southwesterly  and  southerly  for  about  8  miles,  practically  par- 
allel with  the  bluff  20  to  30  feet  high,  which  drops  from  the  valley  plain  to  Center- 
ville Bottoms.  This  portion  of  the  canal  is  frequently  within  ;i  few  rods  of  the  ed^e 
of  the  bluff,  and  is  rarely  more  than  half  a  mile  distant  therefrom. 

About  9  miles  below  its  head  the  canal  is  separated  into  a  number  of  branches 
which  radiate  throughout  the  district  westward  from  Kings  Kiver  below  the  Narrows. 
extending  southeastward  to  lands  east  and  south  of  Sanders,  southward  to  the  vicinity 
of  Kingsburg,  and  southwestward  beyond  Selma  and  well  into  the  Wildflower  country. 

The  main  canal  has  irregular  dimensions,  its  bed  width  being  generally  about  80 
to  35  feet.  It  has  been  allowed  to  cut  deep  into  the  friable  surface  soils  in  the  upper 
sections  of  its  course,  where  but  little  attempt  has  been  made  to  reduce  its  gradient 
below  that  of  the  natural  surface  of  the  ground.  The  length  of  the  main  canal  is 
about  18  miles.  The  length  of  its  three  principal  branches  is  reported  at  about  2(> 
miles. 

The  diversion  .from  the  river  is  effected  by  means  of  a  brush  and  cobblestone 
dam,  in  which  a  small  gate  serves  as  wasteway  and  sand  sluice.  (Fig.  1/5  B.)  The 
canal  regulator  as  close  to  the  river  and  is  of  a  type  very  common  on  Kings  River 
canals.  Three  rows  of  posts  rising  from  a  plank  floor  extend  across  the  canal  from 
one  bulkhead  wall  to  the  other.  The\"  support  a  platform  loaded  with  cobbles  and 
gravel  to  give  stability  to  the  structure.  The  spaces  between  the  upper  posts  are 
closed  by  means  of  vertically  sliding  gates,  each  of  which  has  a  stem  extending  above 
the  platform,  to  which  power  is  applied  when  the  gate  is  to  be  opened  or  closed. 
The  cost  of  the  regulator  was  about  $1,000.  The  first  cost  of  the  canal  was  about 
$35,000. 

This  canal  was  constructed  in  1877  and  1878.  It  was  built  by  a  company  organ- 
ized by  farmers  who  owned  lands  near  Kingsburg  and  Selma.  The  capital  stock  of 
the  corporation  which  they  formed  was  originally  fixed  at  $12,500,  but  was  subse- 
quently increased  to  $35,000,  being  divided  into  50  shares.  The  upper  2  miles  of 
the  canal  was  constructed  by  day  labor.  The  rest  of  the  main  canal  was  divided 
into  sections,  each  of  which  represented  one  share  of  stock,  and  was  assigned  to  some 
stockholder,  who  was  required  to  complete  it.  A  few  unlimited,  unassessable  rights 
to  water  from  the  canal  have  been  granted  to  settlers  near  Centerville  in  considera- 
tion of  rights  of  way.  Each  stockholder  is  entitled  to  the  delivery  of  a  proportional 
part  of  the  water  remaining  available  for  distribution;  but  each  stockholder,  or  the 
corporation  when  in  possession  of  any  shares  of  stock,  may  lease  the  shares.  The 
price  of  a  share  per  month  in  1882  was  $6.  Shares  were  at  that  time  valued  at  about 
$1,500.  Each  share  of  stock  is  supposed  to  represent  *'3  feet  of  water;"  an  expres- 
sion of  quantity  which  seems  as  vague  as  the  amount  named  in  the  franchise  of  the 
company,  "150  cubic  feet  of  water  under  a  4-inch  pressure."  In  fact,  however, 
each  share  of  stock  entitled  its  holder  to  a  proportional  part  of  the  water,  varying 
somewhat  according  to  the  number  of  shares  in  actual  use,  but  not  in  excess  of  three 
times  the  amount  which  would  flow  -i  inches  deep  over  a  clear  overfall  12  inches 
long.  Water  is  apportioned  on  the  judgment  of  a  canal  superintendent.  When 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.     Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXVI. 


WATKR    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVKK.  298 

tin-  iiniount  of  water  per  share  of  stock  in  the  canal  exceeds  three  units,  each  indi- 
cated by  a  deai-  overfull  of  4  inches  on  a  length  of  12  inches,  then  all  surplus  water 
is  held  for  sale,  by  the  directors  of  the  company,  at  fixed  rates  per  month  per  unit. 
The  cost  of  canal  management,  maintenance,  and  repairs  is  assessed  upon  the  stock- 
holders. The  annual  expense  assessment  is  now  about  $80  per  share  of  stock.  The 
works  required  to  divert  water  from  the  main  canal  into  private  ditches,  including 
weirs  in  the  main  canal,  are  constructed  by  the  consumers  of  water,  subject  to 
approval  by  the  canal  company. 

Satisfactory  use  of  this  canal  has  been  interfered  with  to  no  little  extent  by 
litigation,  generally  involving  the  right  of  the  canal  to  receive  water  from  the  river, 
and,  as  in  the  case  of  other  canals  from  Kings  River,  its  permanent  efficiency  as  a 
source  of  supply  has  been  thrown  somewhat  into  doubt  by  adverse  decisions  of  the 
courts. 

The  maximum  capacity  of  this  canal  is  approximately  660  cubic  feet  per  second. 
The  area  irrigated  or  in  some  way  benefited  by  its  water  is  about  20,000  acres. 

ALTA  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT   (76  CANAL). 

The  canal  which  supplies  water  to  the  Alta  Irrigation  District  is  known  as  the 
76  Canal.  It  belongs  to  the  upper  group  of  Kings  River  canals.  Its  head  is  on  the 
south  side  of  the  river  about  1.5  miles  above  the  head  of  the  Kings  River  and  Fresno 
Canal,  if  the  point  at  which  the  uppermost  work  for  the  direction  of  water  toward 
the  canal  regulator  may  be  termed  its  head.  At  that  point  a  branch  of  the  river  has 
been  enlarged  somewhat  and  otherwise  improved,  and  the  water  diverted  from  the 
main  stream  through  this  natural  channel  is  carried  in  a  succession  of  depressions, 
or  high-water  channels,  along  the  southeastern  margin  of  Centerville  Bottoms  about 
3  miles  to  a  point  where  the  canal  cuts  out  upon  the  higher  plain  lying  to  the  east  of 
the  Centerville  Bottoms.  The  natural  depressions  or  water  courses  forming,  the 
head  of  the  canal  have  in  large  part  been  converted  into  a  canal  by  building  up, 
along  their  low  western  banks,  embankments  of  cobblestones  and  bowlders,  which 
were  taken  from  the  beds  of  these  depressions  or  water  courses  in  enlarging  them. 
Where  the  canal  turns  away  from  Centerville  Bottoms  onto  the  upland  a  cut  9  feet 
in  depth  was  necessary.  From  this  point  the  canal  has  a  general  southeasterly 
course,  following  a  grade  line  with  18  inches  fall  to  the  mile,  that  skirts  the  western 
foothill  base.  At  6  miles  below  the  regulator  the  canal  is  carried  across  Wahtoke 
('reek,  and  its  southeasterly  course  is  maintained  about  22  miles  farther,  to  near 
Cottonwood  Creek.  The  main  canal  has  been  made  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  Alta 
Irrigation  District. 

The  bed  width  of  the  canal  throughout  the  first  9.5  miles  below  the  regulator  is 
1  IMI  feet.  The  maximum  amount  of  water  carried  has  been  approximated  at  about 
!»i " )  cubic  feet  per  second.  With  a  depth  of  5  feet  of  water,  which  has  thus  far  never 
been  attained,  the  capacity  would  be  about  1,200  cubic  feet  per  second.  From  the 
main  canal  numerous  branches  extend  southwesterly  and  southerly  into  the  heart  of 
the  district.  The  principal  of  these  is  the  Traver  branch,  which  has  been  given  a 
bed  width  of  60  feet.  It  leaves  the  main  canal  about  1.5  miles  below  Wahtoke  Creek, 
and,  as  its  name  indicates,  delivers  water  to  lands  in  the  vicinity  of  Traver.  Branch 
canals  are  for  the  most  pai't  located  across  the  valle}'  plain  on  lines  of  its  greatest 


294  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

slope.  They  have  generally  been  given  positions  on  high  ground  intermediate 
between  gentle  depressions,  though  in  some  instances,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Traver 
branch,  natural  water  courses  have  been  in  large  part  substituted  for  expensive  canal 
work. 

The  inflow  of  water  from  the  upper  canal  section  into  the  second  section  of  the 
main  canal  is  controlled  by  means  of  a  regulator  or  headgate.  Above  the  regulator 
in  the  west  canal  bank  is  a  spillway  through  which  surplus  waters  are  dropped  into 
Patterson  Slough,  one  of  the  Kings  River  channels  in  Centerville  Bottoms.  The 
regulator  is  100  feet  wide  in  the  direction  across  the  canal,  by  30  feet  along  its  axis. 
The  surface  of  the  floor  is  at  grade  of  the  canal  bottom. 

The  canal  was  constructed  in  1882.  This  was  before  the  enactment  of  the  irriga- 
tion-district law.  Its  construction  was  undertaken  by  a  private  corporation,  on  a 
plan  which  was  very  satisfactorily  carried  out.  As  soon  as  the  feasibility  of  making 
the  diversion  of  water  from  the  river  was  assured,  about  40,000  acres  of  land  on  the 
plains  to  be  commanded  by  the  canal  were  bought  for  the  corporation  at  prices  less 
than  $10  per  acre.  These  lands  were  offered  for  sale  as  soon  as  the  canal  came  into 
service,  at  prices  somewhat  in  excess  of  the  added  cost  of  canal  construction.  It 
was  proposed  to  establish  each  year  a  schedule  of  prices  to  be  adhered  to  for  a  year, 
but  the  demand  for  land  was  so  great  at  the  prices  fixed  during  the  first  few  years 
that  the  lands  were  repeatedly  withdrawn  from  sale.  The  expenditure  of  less  than 
$300,000  in  four  years  thus  created  and  increased  values  to  an  estimated  amount  of 
over  $800,000,  not  including  increased  values  of  properties  in  which  the  canal  company 
had  no  direct  interest. 

Before  the  canal  was  sold  to  the  Alta  Irrigation  District  water  rights  were  issued 
to  purchasers  of  all  lands  sold  by  the  canal  company  and  were  for  sale  to  others 
owning  land  in  the  district  commanded.  A  water  right  was  denned  as  4o  miner's 
inches  of  water,  and  was  located  upon  some  particular  40-acre  tractor  land,  of  which 
it  became  an  appurtenance.  Each  full  water  right  was  made  liable  to  an  assess- 
ment of  $20  per  year  to  cover  expenses  of  canal  management.  The  price  of  a  water 
right  was  fixed  at  $200. 

The  Alta  Irrigation  District  was  formed  in  1888  and  was  made  to  include  the 
lands  to  be  irrigated  from  the  76  Canal.  It  extends  southerly  from  Kings  River  to 
and  even  beyond  Cottonwood  Creek  and  westerly  to  within  a  mile  of  the  eastern 
border  of  the  Kings  River  delta,  and  has  an  area  of  130,000  acres.  Two  years  later 
the  district  purchased  the  canal  and  its  branches,  paying  therefor  $410,000  in  bonds 
of  the  district.  This  covered  the  repayment  to  holders  of  water  rights  of  the 
amounts  which  they  had  paid  for  them. 

The  northern  apex  of  the  Alta  Irrigation  District  is  at  the  western  base  of 
Tchoenimne  Mountain,  where  a  second  river  bottom,  10  to  20  feet  higher  than 
Centerville  Bottoms,  lies  below  the  76  Canal.  From  the  second  bottom,  which  is 
long  and  narrow,  having  an  area  of  nearly  7,000  acres,  there  is  an  abrupt  rise  of  I'D 
to  35  feet  to  the  upland  or  main  east-side  San  .Joaquin  Valley  plain.  The  surface 
of  this  plain  drops  away  gently  from  the  base  of  the  hills  southwestward  toward  the 
valley  trough.  Its  slope  is  at  first  about  10  feet  to  the  mile,  but  this  becomes  grad- 
ually less  and  is  only  6  feet  to  the  mile  near  T raver.  The  only  notable  break  in  the 
surface  of  this  portion  of  the  valley  plain  is  made  by  Wahtoke  Creek,  which,  in  its 


WATKK    Al'l'KOI'KIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVEK.  295 

southwesterly  course  from  the  foothills  of  the  Sierra  Nevada,  passes  to  the  east  and 
south  of  Campbells  Mountain  and  discharges  into  Kings  River  at  the  Narrows.  It 
flows  in  a  wide,  deep  gorge  from  foothill  base  to  the  river.  Southward  from 
\Vahtoke  Creek  are  several  minor  creek  channels,  which  carry  water  only  in  very 
wet  seasons  and  sink,  or  spread  before  reaching  Cross  Creek. 

After  the  purchase  of  the  76  Canal  system  by  the  irrigation  district  in  1890 
more  branch  canals  were  necessary.  These  were  constructed,  under  the  direction 
and  supervision  of  the  district  engineer,  by  private  parties,  from  whom  they  were 
then  bought,  payment  being  made  with  irrigation-district  bonds.  About  150  miles 
of  branch  ditches  were  thus  constructed  at  a  total  cost  in  bonds  of  $133,000.  The 
entire  district  is  now  covered  with  branch  canals,  which  are  rarely  more  than  2  to  3 
miles  apart. 

The  area  of  land  to  whose  surface  water  is  now  actually  applied  is  estimated  by 
the  district  officers  at  50,000  acres.  The  distribution  of  water  is  in  charge  of  a  canal 
superintendent  and  seven  assistants  called  "ditch  tenders." 

The  soil  of  this  region  is  for  the  most  part  a  sandy  loam,  with  coarse,  clayey 
sands  near  the  eastern  border  of  the  district,  and  finer,  lighter  sands  toward  the  west. 
Much  alkali  is  in  the  soil  to  the  west  and  southwest  of  Traver.  Hardpan  subsoils 
are  common  at  2  to  5  feet  below  the  surface.  Ground  water  before  1883  was  20  to 
50  feet.  It  was  nearest  the  surface  in  the  southern  and  western  portions  of  this' 
district.  Irrigation  is  causing  the  water  table  to  rise,  particularly  near  Traver. 
It  now  stands  at  2  to  6  feet  at  Traver  and  at  5  to  8  feet  at  Dinuba. 

Water  is  usually  available  for  irrigation  from  February  until  the  end  of  July. 
There  is  practically  no  restriction  upon  the  use  of  water  by  irrigators.  No  measure- 
ments are  made.  Each  irrigator  takes  all  the  water  he  requires  and  when  he  can  get 
it.  Where  used  on  a  small  scale,  land  is  occasionally  prepared  for  it  by  subdivision' 
into  small  rectangular  checks.  This  was  the  preferred  system  when  water  was  first 
introduced  into  the  vicinity  of  Traver.  Now  the  contour-check  method  of  irrigation 
is  finding  more  favor.  The  reason  for  this  preference  seems  to  be  due  not  only  to 
reduced  first  cost,  but  also  to  the  fact  that  it  requires  less  cutting  down  of  surface 
soils  than  the  level-check  method  of  irrigation.  The  uncovered  subsoils  are  often 
found  to  be  relatively  barren.  Orchards,  vineyards,  and  summer  crops  are  quite 
generally  being  irrigated  by  the  furrow  method.  Grain  land,  if  wet  at  all,  is  irrigated 
by  spreading  water  over  the  surface  from  small  ditches  or  furrows,  usually  before 
sowing,  preferably  soon  after  harvest. 

This  being  one  of  the  canals  of  most  recent  construction,  it  is  one  of  Ihose  which 
would  be  most  benefited  by  a  final  adjudication  of  rights.  Most  of  the  other  canal 
organizations  have  been  forced  to  recognize  the  inexpediency  of  trusting  to  legal 
tribunals  to  determine  relative  rights  to  the  use  of  water  on  the  basis  of  existing 
laws  and  facts  which  arc  apt  to  be  more  or  less  distorted.  The  preferable  arrange- 
ment seems  to  be  to  make  agreements  with  each  other,  stipulating  how  the  water 
should  be  apportioned  when  there  is  less  than  enough  for  all.  Alta  Irrigation  District 
being  in  the  most  favored  position  for  a  diversion  of  water  from  the  river,  and  being 
comparatively  a  recent  'i<iimant,  is  beset  by  riparian  owners  and  by  other  appro- 
priators,  and  has  not  only ,  on  complaint  of  riparian  owners,  been  decreed  to  have  no 
right  to  divert  any  water  except  for  a  very  limited  amount  of  riparian  land,  but  in 


296  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

other  decisions  its  rights  are  made  subject  to  the  prior  rights  of  other  canals,  deter- 
mined apparently  from  conditions  as  they  existed  when  the  various  causes  of  action 
came  to  trial,  rather  than  upon  such  conditions  as  actually  prevailed  at  the  time  the 
76  Canal  work  was  inaugurated  in  1882. 

The  question  as  to  the  irrigation  district's  right  to  water  has  not  heen  its  only 
source  of  trouble.  The  legality  of  some  of  the  recent  acts  of  the  district  directors 
having  been  called  into  question,  a  decision  has  been  rendered  by  the  superior  court, 
declaring  district  bonds  to  have  been  illegally  issued  on  the  ground  that  plans  and 
an  estimate  of  cost  of  the  work  were  not  made  before  the  bonds  were  issued. 

The  annual  expense  of  canal  management  and  water  distribution,  including  litiga- 
tion, is  $14,000  to  $18,000.  One-third  of  this  amount  has  in  the  past  been  expended 
for  litigation.  Twelve  thousand  dollars  is  thought  to  be  a  reasonable  allowance  to 
meet  district  expenses  and  to  operate  the  canal  system.  Money  is  raised  from  the 
property  owners  of  the  district  to  meet  current  expenses  by  assessments  based  on 
property  valuation.  Objection  to  this  system  seems  to  be  raised  only  by  nonresident 
property  owners.  The  best  lands  of  the  district  are,  for  purposes  of  this  tax, 
assessed  at  $25  per  acre,  and  the  assessment  on  lands  of  this  class  ordinarily  amounts 
to  20  to  25  cents  per  acre.  To  meet  interest  on  outstanding  bonds  this  tax  rate  is 
doubled. 

SELMA  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT. 

Selma  Irrigation  District  was  organized  in  1890  for  the  purpose  of  securing  better 
control  and  more  satisfactory  distribution  of  water  throughout  the  territory  com- 
manded by  the  Fowler  Switch  and  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  canals.  The  dis- 
trict lay  upon  the  north  side  of  Kings  River,  extending  southwesterly  from  Sanger. 
.It  had  an  area  of  271,000  acres.  It  was  proposed  to  issue  bonds  to  the  amount  of 
$1,000,000  for  the  purchase  of  existing  canals  and  the  improvement  of  distributing 
works.  The  bond  issue  was,  however,  twice  defeated  at  the  polls  and  all  proceedings 
under  the  district  organization  have  been  abandoned.  The  existence  of  the  district 
has  been  legally  terminated. 

SUNSET   IRRIGATION  DISTRICT. 

Sunset  Irrigation  District  covered  the  lowest  portion  of  the  west-side  plain  of  San 
Joaquin  Valley,  extending  northward  from  the  southern  limit  of  Tulare  Lake  70 
miles  to  within  3  miles  of  the  point  where  Fresno  Slough  unites  with  San  Joaquin 
River.  Its. width  ranged  from  1  to  12  miles,  and  its  area  was  about  363.500  acres. 
The  district  organization  was  effected  in  March,  1891.  Water  for  the  district  was  to 
be  obtained  by  gravity  flow  from  the  vicinity  of  Summit  Lake,  where  a  large  area  in 
the  delta  region  of  Kings  River  was  to  have  been  converted  into  a  reservoir.  Those 
portions  of  the  district  which  could  not  be  covered  by  gravity  flow  from  this  source 
were  to  be  served  with  water  pumped  by  means  of  centrifugal  pumps  to  higher  king 
canals.  For  the  terms  of  the  contract  made  by  this  district  with  the  owners  of 
Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  reference  may  be  made  to  the  paragraph  relating  to  the 
canals  of  this  rancho  (p.  308).  The  district  voted  a  bond  issue  of  $2,0001,000;  of  this 
amount  $25,000  was  paid  for  water  rights,  a  reservoir  site,  and  rights  of  wav. 
Although  the  directors  entered  into  a  contract  for  the  construction  of-  the  necessary 


WATKK     Al'I'KOI'UI  A  TION     FROM     KIN<JS     KIVKR.  297 

irrigation  works  at  an  agreed  price  of  $1,500,000  no  works  were  constructed.  As 
a  result  of  litigation  the  district  has  been  declared  illegally  organi/ed.  and  all  district 
proceedings  have  been  terminated. 

CABMELITA  DITCH. 

This  is  a  small  ditch  which  supplies  water  to  the  lands  of  the  Carmelite  Vineyard 
Company  and  to  Mrs.  M.  J.  I).  Reese.  Its  head  is  near  and  just  below  the  wastcgat. 
of  the  7<5  Canal.  The  ditch  was  built  in  1896  to  divert  the  water  claimed  under  :i 
notice  of  appropriation  tiled  by  S.  F.  Karle.  The  amount  claimed  is  5  cubic  feet  per 
second.  The  ditch  has  a  direct  connection  with  a  channel  of  the  river  and  can  also 
be  supplied  with  water  from  the  76  Canal.  During  the  greater  part  of  the  year  water 
is  delivered  into  the  ditch  from  the  7f',  Canal,  but  in  August,  September,  and  October, 
when  there  is  no  water  in  the  canal,  it  is  let  into  the  ditch  through  an  8-foot  head- 
gate  direct  from  the  river.  The  right  to  use  water  is  claimed  as  a  riparian  right. 

The  cost  of  the  ditch  was  about  £4(>u.  and  the  annual  expense  for  maintenance  is 
about  !fc!5.  Litigation  with  the  Peoples  Ditch  Company,  the  Lower  Kings  River 
Water  Ditch  Company,  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company,  and  with  owners  of 
ditches  in  the  Centerville  Bottoms  has  cost  about  $300,  and  the  various  actions  have 
not  yet  been  brought  to  trial.  The  method  of  irrigation  with  water  from  this  ditch 
is  chiefly  by  saturation  of  subsoils,  it  being  deemed  advisable  to  keep  ground  water 
within  8  feet  below  the  surface. 

PEOPLES   DITCH. 

This  is  a  canal  of  the  lower  group  whose  head  is  on  the  south  side  of  Kings  River, 
about  one-half  mile  above  the  head  of  Cole  Slough.  Kings  River  at  this  point  flows 
in  a  broad,  sandy  bed,  to  which  there  is  a  steep  descent  of  about  15  feet  from  the 
level  of  the  main  valley  plain  on  the  south.  The  canal  follows  the  margin  of  this 
plain  for  some  distance  southwesterly  as  it  recedes  from  the  river,  and  is  gradual  Iv 
brought  out  upon  the  surface  of  the  plain  about  3  miles  below  its  head.  At  about  4- 
miles  below  its  head  the  distribution  of  its  water  to  its  branches  commences.  The 
diversion  of  water  from  the  river  is  effected  at  low  stage  by  means  of  a  dam  of  brush 
and  sand,  which  is  annually  repaired  at  considerable  expense.  Until  within  the  last 
few  years  the  inflow  into  the  canal  was  controlled  by  two  regulators,  one  of  which 
was  within  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  the  river  bank,  the  other  about  2  miles  below. 
-These  were  24  feet  in  width  and  were  of  the  ordinary  culvert  type  with  vertically 
sliding  gates. 

There  is  a  new  regulating  gate  now  in  service  within  several  hundred  yards  of 
the  head  of  the  canal.  (Fig.  14  A.)  This  is  a  massive,  well-built  structure,  38  feet 
wide  between  side  walls,  which  supports  an  earth  fill  about  2  feet  thick,  serving  as  a 
roadway  over  the  canal.  The  space  between  side  walls  is  subdivided  by  10-by-lO-inch 
posts  into  ten  bays  or  openings,  each  of  which  is  closed  by  means  of  a  vertically 
sliding  gate.  Power  is  applied  to  the  gate  stems  by  means  of  a  lever,  the  end  of 
which  engages  between  the  teeth  of  a  rack. 

The  canal  has  a  fall  of  only  about  one-half  foot  in  the  first  2  miles  of  its  course. 
The  effective  fall  is  increased  somewhat  by  keeping  the  brush  dam  at  a  good  height. 
The  canal  us  originally  constructed  was  -J4  feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  and  was  intended 


298 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


to  carry  4  feet  of  water.  Its  estimated  capacity  was  about  220  cubic  feet  per 
second.  As  approximated  this  season  the  capacity  may  be  noted  at  330  cubic  feet 
per  second.  Below  the  second  regulating  gate  the  width  of  the  canal  increases  to  30 
feet,  and  the  depth  of  water  to  be  carried  is  only  3  feet.  These  dimensions  are  main- 


HEADWORKS 

OF 

A    PEOPLES  CANAL 

B    LAST  CHANCE  AND  LEINBERGER  CANALS 
C    LOWER  KINGS  RIVER  CANAL 


1000 


F:G.  14.  —  A,  headworks  of  Peoples  Canal  :  B,  head  works  oi'  Last  Chance  nml 

Kings  111  ver  Canal. 


canals;  C,  headworks  of 


teined  for  about  4  miles,  still  in  a  southwesterly  direction  and  extending  well  into 
the  northeastern  extremity  of  that  portion  of  the  Kings  River  delta  usually  referred 
to  as  the  Mussel  Slough  country.  The  canal  has  three  principal  brandies  West 
Fork,  which  terminates  near  (Jrangeville;  Middle  Fork,  which  passes  just  to  the 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIYKK.  299 

westward  of  llanford;  and  Kast  Fork,  which  passes  through  the  southern  portion  of 
Hanford.  and  extends  to  points  4  miles  farther  south.  The  aggregate  length  of  the 
main  canal  and  its  principal  branches  is  about  37  miles.  This  canal  was  constructed 
by  the  Peoples  Ditch  Company  in  Is73  and  the  following  years.  The  first  notice  of 
a  claim  to  water  was  posted  late  in  1872.  The  company,  formed  by  settlers  who 
wanted  water  for  their  own  lands,  was  finally  incorporated  in  1873.  Its  capital  stock, 
originally  fixed  at  $10,000,  was  soon  increased  to  $35,000,  and  later  to  1100,000.  The 
first  cost  o4"  the  canal  was  about  $50,000  to  $60,000.  The  total  cost  of  canal  construc- 
tion and  annual  expense  accounts  had  reached  1120,000  in  1881.  About  $4,000  to 
$6,000  is  annually  expended  on  the  dam.  The  total  annual  expenditure  for  manage- 
ment, maintenance,  and  repairs  is  about  $10,000. 

Of  the  100  shares  into  which  the  company's  capital  stock  is  divided  about  one- 
third  have  reverted  to  the  corporation.  The  remaining  shares  are  in  the  hands  of 
irrigators.  to  whom  water  is  delivered  in  amounts  proportional  to  their  holdings  of 
stock.  The  stockholders  are,  permitted  to  sell  the  water  to  which  they  are  entitled, 
and  to  ask  for  its  delivery  through  any  of  the  canal  branches.  Its  use  is  not  restricted, 
except  for  the  season,  to  any  particular  tract  of  land.  The  delivery  of  water  to 
irrigators  is  usually  through  gates  1  to  4  feet.  wide.  It  is  discharged  under  pressure, 
the  endeavor  being  to  make  amounts  delivered  proportional  to  stock  which  it  repre- 
sents without  any  attempt  at  actual  measurement.  A  canal  superintendent,  with 
necesssarv  assistants,  has  charge  of  the  delivery  of  water.  Its  equitable  distribution 
depends  largely  on  the  judgment  of  the  canal  superintendent. 

During  the  years  1883  and  1884  the  experiment  was  tried  of  selling  water  to 
stockholders  at  $^oo  per  share  of  stock  per  year;  to  those  not  holding  stock  an 
equivalent  quantity  at  $300  per  year,  but  it  did  not  prove  satisfactory.  All  stock- 
holders are  assessed  to  meet  the  annual  expenses.  The  area  of  land  actually  irrigated 
or  benefited  by  the  water  of  this  canal  is  about  25,000  acres. 

MUSSEL   SLOUGH  DITCH. 

This  canal,  which  is  now  out  of  service,  took  its  name  from  one  of  the  delta  chan- 
nels of  Kings  River,  which  has  been  utilized  for  the  distribution  of  water.  The  canal, 
unlike  the  other  canals  of  the  Kings  River  delta,  was  constructed  for  speculative  pur- 
poses. It  was  proposed  to  turn  a  large  volume  of  water  from  the  river  into  the  slough 
and  to  derive  a  revenue  from  its  sale  to  irrigators.  The  head  of  the  canal  was  on 
the  south  side  of  Kings  River,  about  7  miles  below  the  head  of  the  Peoples  Ditch.  A 
narrow  cut,  the  original  bed  width  of  which  was  about  10  feet,  was  made  from  that 
point  southerly  and  thence  southwesterly  along  the  upper  portion  of  the  channel  of 
Mussel  Slough.  The  bottom  of  this  cut  throughout  a  little  more  than  a  mile  from 
its  head  was  made  level,  being  at  an  elevation  a  little  below  that  of  the  river  bed  at 
the  head  of  the  canal.  The  upper  portion  of  this  cut,  near  the  river,  is  over  14  feet 
in  depth.  As  the  canal  leaves  the  river  it  grows  wider,  and  at  about  3  miles  from  its 
head  the  natural  channel  of  Mussel  Slough  afforded  ample  capacity  for  its  waters. 

Mussel  Slough  and  its  principal  branches.  Sand  Slough  and  Lone  Oak  Slough,  have 
a  general  southwesterly  course  through  the  delta  lands,  passing  to  the  west  of  Han- 
ford  and  extending  to  the  high-water  line  of  Tulare  Lake.  The  canal  is  now  out  of 
service  and  was  not  in  use  for  three  years  preceding  1896.  Its  head  was  dosed  with 


300  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

an  embankment  of  earth  in  18D4.  because  at  that  time  the  river  threatened  to  destroy 
the  canal  headgate  and  cause  inundation  of  the  upper  and  central  portions  of  the  delta. 

The  canal  headgate  or  regulator  was  placed  in  the  deepest  portion  of  the  cut, 
near  the  bank  of  the  river.  It  was  made  24  feet  wide,  the  space  between  its  walls 
being  divided  into  a  number  of  openings  by  vertical  posts,  between  which  gates  slid 
vertically.  The  structure  had  the  usual  upper  platform  loaded  with  earth,  making  a 
roadway  20  feet  wide.  Its  floor  length  was  40  feet.  Sheet  piling  8  feet  deep  was  used 
on  the  upper  floor  line  and  for  12  feet  under  each  wing;  sheet  piling  was  also  driven 
(!  feet  deep  across  the  canal,  on  the  middle  line  of  the  floor,  and  at  its  lower  edge. 

Throughout  the  length  of  the  natural  channel  utilized  for  the  water  of  the  Mussel 
Slough  Ditch,  check  weirs  or  gates  were  constructed  with  which  to  hold  the  water 
surface  at  or  above  the  surface  of  the  ground.  Irrigation  was  to  be  accomplished 
by  subirrigation  on  a  large  scale.  The  charge  for  water  ranged  from  31.25  to  62.5 
cents  per  acre  per  year.  There  was  little  or  no  restriction  as  to  the  amount  of  water 
to  be  used  by  individual  takers  of  water,  and  the  principal  duty  of  the  canal  super- 
intendent seems  to  have  been  to  prevent  those  from  taking  water  who  had  no  inten- 
tion of  paying  for  it.  The  total  cost  of  the  canal  works  connected  therewith  was 
about  $50,000  to  $60,000.  • 

This  canal  was  constructed  in  1875.  Its  promoters  formed  a  corporation  with  a 
capital  stock  fixed  at  $500,000,  divided  into  10,000  shares,  all  of  which  remained  in 
the  hands  of  a  few  persons.  The  canal  capacity  was  about  200  to  300  cubic  feet  per 
second. 

LAST   CHANCE    DITCH. 

One  of  the  most  important  of  the  Kings  River  delta  canals  is  the  Last  Chance 
Ditch,  whose  head  is  on  the  south  side  of  the  river  about  2.5  miles  by  river  above 
Kingston.  The  course  of  the  canal  and  its  branches  is  southerly.  It  commands  a 
district  3  to  4  miles  wide,  extending  from  near  the  river  southerly  to  near  high-water 
line  of  Tulare  Lake.  Grangeville  lies  at  the  eastern  border  of  this  district  and 
Armona  well  within  it.  Lands  along  its  eastern  border  are  commanded  jointly  b\- 
this  canal  and  the  Peoples  Ditch.  A  natural  cut  through  the  south  bank  of  the  river, 
known  as  Leinberger  Slough,  has  been  utilized  for  the  head  of  the  canal.  (Fig.  14  H.) 
This  slough  is  really  one  of  the  lower  delta  channels  of  the  river.  The  canal  is  cut 
from  its  south  bank,  about  150  feet  from  the  river.  The  canal  regulator  is  about  800 
feet  below  its  head.  The  water  entering  the  head  of  the  slough  is  divided,  a  portion 
flowing  down  the  natural  channel,  the  rest  entering  the  head  of  the  Last  Chance  Ditch. 
The  canal  has  a  bed  width  of  25  feet,  and  was  designed  for  a  4-foot  depth  of  water. 
Its  course  is  a  little  west  of  south  for  7  miles  to  a  point  half  a  mile  west  of  (irange- 
ville,  where  it  is  divided  into  two  principal  branches.  One  of  these  has  a  south- 
westerly course,  and  at  the  end  of  3  miles  drops  its  water  into  a  natural  channel 
which  has  a  southerly  course  and  connected  with  Mussel  Slough.  The  other  branch 
is  again  divided  within  a  mile,  forming  a  middle  and  an  eastern  branch,  both  of 
which  extend  far  toward  the  south.  These  main  branches  were  all  made  16  feet  wide 
on  the  bottom,  and  were  planned  to  carry  water  2.5  feet  deep.  The  gradient  of  the 
canal  is  about  1  foot  to  the  mile. 


WATKK     AIM'KOI'KIATION     FROM     KINtiS     KIVKK.  301 

The  original  c;in:il  regulator,  which  was  in  service  from  187-4  to  1880,  was  made 
18  foot  wide  liolwoon  side  walls  and  is  reported  to  have  cost  $5,600.  It  was  replaced 
bv  ;i  second  one.  :>o  feet  wide,  at  a  cost  of  $3,000.  The  removal  of  sand  from  the 
canals,  which  had  boon  swept  in  by  high  water  during  the  period  when  there  was 
no  gate  at  the  head  of  the  canal,  is  said  to  have  cost  $3,000.  The  regulator  now  in 
use  is  of  the  ordinary  box  type.  Its  side  walls  rise  to  a  height  of  14  feet.  Between 
them  are  posts  which  support  a  platform  or  bridge  that  affords  convenient  access  to 
the  gates.  The  gateposts  divide  the  space  between  the  side  walls  into  six  openings, 
each  of  which  is  closed  with  planking  permanently  from  the  top  down  to  about  5 
feet  from  the  floor. 

The  Last  Chance  Ditch  was  constructed  in  1873  and  1874  by  a  company  known 
as  the  Last  Chance  Water  Ditch  Company,  which  was  organized  and  incorporated 
bv  the  farmers  to  whose  land  it  was  to  supply  water.  The  original  30  shares  into 
which  the  capital  stock  of  $30,000  was  divided  were  a  few  years  later  increased  to  60 
shares,  and  the  capital  stock  was  also  doubled.  Only  about  two-thirds  of  these 
shares  are  in  the  hands  of  stockholders.  Until  1886  all  operating  and  repair  expenses, 
about  $4,000  per  year,  were  assessed  upon  the  stockholders,  and  water  was  delivered 
to  these  without  charge,  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  stock  owned  or  controlled. 
Very  little  water  is  sold  by  the  acre. 

There  has  been  no  system  of  water  measurement  introduced.  Water  is  delivered 
to  irrigators  through  a  great  variety  of  gates;  generally,  however,  through  openings 
under  pressure.  A  canal  superintendent  and  an  assistant  have  charge  of  its  distri- 
bution. During  the  high-water  period  an  attendant  is  kept  constantly  at  the  head- 
gate.  The  canal  ordinarily  carries  water  from  the  beginning  of  February  to  the  end 
of  July. 

The  cost  of  canal  management  and  maintenance  during  the  last  three  years  has 
been  about  $8,000  per  year.  One-half  of  this  amount  was  expended  for  litigation. 
The  operating  expenses  ordinarily  are  about  $4,000  per  year.  The  canal  this  year 
was  found  to  be  quite  foul  with  weeds  and  much  land  in  the  district  commanded  by 
the  canal  seems  to  have  been  injured  by  too  copious  subirrigation,  with  a  resulting 
accumulation  of  alkaline  salts  in  surface  soils.  The  area  irrigated  by  the  canal  and 
that  benefited  to  a  greater  or  less  degree  by  its  waters  is  about  20,000  acres.  The 
canal  capacity  has  been  approximated  at  360  cubic  feet  per  second. 

LEINBERGEB  SLOUGH. 

This  is  a  natural  high-water  channel  and  receives  water  from  Kings  River  on  its 
south  side  at  the  same  point  as  the  Last  Chance  Ditch.  When  the  Last  Chance 
Ditch  was  constructed,  advantage  was  taken  of  the  upper  end  of  this  natural  water 
course  and  water  was  diverted  through  it  into  the  artificial  canal.  It  is  only  within 
the  last  few  years  that  systematic  effort  seems  to  have  been  made  to  utilize  the  water 
of  the  slough,  although  a  headgate  has  been  maintained  iu  it  for  a  much  longer  period 
just  below  the  point  at  which  the  Last  Chance  Ditch  leaves  it.  Its  capacity  may 
be  noted  at  about  50  cubic  feet  per  second.  After  flowing  about  4  miles  in  the 
natural  channel  of  the  slough,  the  water  is  turned  into  a  canal  having  a  southerly 
direction  and  used  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  water  to  the  lands  of  the  owners  of 


302 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


the  ditch.  This  distribution  of  water  from  the  ditch  is  under  control  of  a  superin- 
tendent, and  water  is  apportioned  according  to  the  needs  and  relative  interests  of  the 
owners. 

LOWER  KINGS  RIVER  CANAL. 

This  is  another  south  side  canal  in  the  Kings  River  delta.      Its  head  is  about  ti 
miles  below  Kingston.    (Fig.  1-t  C.)    Its  course  is  southerly,  and  the  district  it  com- 


PART   OF 

A     LOWER  KINGS  RiVER  CANAl 
AND 

HEADWORKS 

OP 

B        EMIGRANT  CANAL 
C       LIBERTY  CANAL 
D        SOUTH  tHLLBACE  DITCH 

TURNER  DITCH 

REED  DITCH 


FIG.  15. — A,  Lower  Kings  River  Canal;  B,  headworks  of  Emigrant  Canal;  C,  head  works  of  Liberty  Canal;  D,  head  works  of 
South  Millmce  Ditch;  E,  heudworksof  Turner  Ditch;  F,  headworks  of  Reed  Ditch. 

inands  lies  just  westward  of  that  of  Last  Chance  Ditch  and  has  Lemoore  in  its  center. 
The  canal  is  cut  southerly  from  the  river,-and  at  the  end  of  its  first  mile  reaches  Lein- 
berger  Slough,  into  which  its  water  is  dropped.  (Fig.  15  A.)  It  is  reclaimed  from  this 
slough  less  than  half  a  mile  below  that  point,  and  thence  has  a  southerly  course  to 
within  about  3  miles  of  Lemoore.  Two  principal  branches — the  East  Branch,  about  -iO 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  303 

feet  wide,  and  the  West  Branch,  about  10  feet  wide — extend  toward  the  south  from 
this  point.  Near  the  river  the  main  canal  crosses  high-water  sloughs  fed  by  the  over- 
bank  flow  from  Kings  River.  These  natural  channels  have  been  closed  by  dams  on  the 
lower  or  west  side  of  the  canal.  Their  water,  together  with  other  water  escaping  from 
Kings  River  above  the  head  of  this  canal,  is  received  by  the  canal  and  carried  to 
Leinberger  Slough.  At  the  point  where  the  canal  leaves  this  slough  a  wasteway  50 
feet  long  is  maintained,  through  which  surplus  waters  are  discharged.  This  is  a 
very  light  structure,  which  is  reported  to  have  rendered  good  service.  Its  length 
was  recently  reduced  from  260  feet  to  50  feet.  Some  years  ago  it  was  proposed  to 
supplement  it  with  a  second  wastegate  200  feet  long,  nearer  the  head  of  the  canal. 
The  main  canal  regulator  or  headgate  has  been  set  close  to  the  river  bank.  A  second- 
ary regulating  gate  is  just  below  the  Leinberger  Slough  wastegate.  Each  gate  is 
about  42  feet  wide  between  side  walls.  The  headgate  is  arranged  similarly  to  that 
described  for  the  Last  Chance  Ditch.  The  main  canal  is  about  40  feet  wide.  It  was 
built  on  a  very  light  grade.  The  bottom  of  the.  canal,  commencing  at  the  same  eleva- 
tion as  the  river  bottom,  was  reported  level  throughout  the  first  5  miles  of  its  course. 
The  effective  gradient  (slope  of  water  surface)  when  full  is  reported  at  5  inches  to 
the  mile,  with  a  2. 5-foot  depth  at  the  forks  of  the  canal.  Work  on  this  canal  com- 
menced in  1870.  The  entire  delta  region  of  the  river  was  naturally  well  watered, 
but  the  water  was  irregularly  and  unequally  distributed;  to  become  really  beneficial 
it  had  to  be  brought  under  control.  This  canal  was  the  first  enterprise  of  magnitude 
with  this  end  in  view  constructed  in  the  delta  region  of  the  river.  Twenty-seven 
persons,  all  interested  landowners,  joined  in  an  agreement  under  which  the  canal  was 
to  be  constructed,  and  which  provided  that  each  person  was  to  bear  a  proportional 
part  of  "all  expenses  above"  his  "farther  boundary."  It  was  at  first  made  18  feet 
wide  on  the  bottom  near  its  head,  and  10  feet  wide  at  5  miles  below  its  head.  It  was 
enlarged  in  1873.  The  first  headgate  was  constructed  in  1872  and  is  reported  to  have 
had  a  width  of  18  feet.  It  was  washed  out  the  following  winter  and  was  at  once 
replaced  by  another,  which  was  in  use  till  1876.  After  this  second  regulating  gate 
was  swept  away  the  canal  was  operated  without  an  upper  gate  until  1877,  when  the 
third  regulator,  40  feet  wide,  was  built,  at  a  cost  of  about  $3,000.  The  fourth  gate, 
built  in  1881,  is  now  in  service. 

The  canal  was  built  and  is  owned  by  those  to  whom  it  supplies  water.  Its 
owners,  who  had  organized  as  a  company,  formed  a  corporation  in  1873  with  a 
capital  stock  fixed  at  $30,000  in  100  shares. 

The  water  in  the  canal  is  supposed  to  be  represented  by  those  shares  of  stock 
which  have  been  issued,  which  is  a  little  more  than  one-half  of  the  full  number  of 
shares  of  capital  stock.  It  is  sold  by  directors  of  the  company,  but  only  to  the 
extent  of  the  shares  which  have  been  issued.  Each  of  these  represents  a  propor- 
tional part  of  the  flow  of  the  canal  until  such  part  exceeds  144  miner's  inches.  Water 
in  excess  of  this  amount  is  at  the  further  disposal  of  the  company.  Stockholders  are 
preferred  purchasers  of  water  to  the  extent  of  the  shares  owned  by  each,  and  pro 
vided  the  application  for  water  is  made  preceding  a  fixed  date.  Each  share  of  stock 
is  supposed  to  represent  sufficient  water  for  320  acres.  The  annual  cost  of  canal 
management  and  repairs  is  from  $3,-000  to  $4,000.  The  first  cost  of  the  canal  was 
about  $30,000.  For  a  number  of  years  after  organization  all  expenses  were  assessed 


304  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

upon  stockholders,  but  this  proving  unsatisfactory  the  plan  of  selling  water  was 
introduced  with  good  results.  The  extent  of  irrigation  from  this  canal  may  l>e  noted 
at  about  20,000  acres.  The  capacity  of  the  canal  may  be  noted  at  about  245  cubic 

feet  per  second. 

KHOADS   CANAL. 

This  was  originally  an  independent  canal,  supplying  about  3,000  to  4,0oo  acres 
of  land  westward  of  Lemoore.  The  canal  received  water  from  a  high-water  slough 
upon  the  south  side  of  the  main  channel  of  Kings  River,  and  the  canal  itself,  in  its 
upper  section,  had  the  appearance  of  a  natural  high-water  channel.  The  upper 
section  of  the  canal  was  originally  known  as  Wrights  Cut,  and  was  claimed  to  be  an 
enlargement  of  a  small  ditch  constructed  when  irrigation  in  this  district  was  in  its 
infancy.  The  canal  now  has  no  separate  headgate,  but  receives  water  from  the 
Lower  Kings  River  Canal. 

TTTLAR.E   LAKE   BED   CANALS. 

During  the  last  three  years,  owing  to  a  recession  of  the  waters  of  Tulare  Lake, 
farming  operations  have  been  gradually  extended  over  the  area  before  covered  with 
water.  The  lands,  after  the  recession  of  waters,  are  as  much  in  need  of  irrigation 
as  the  higher  plain  lands.  Owing  to  the  very  flat  and  smooth  surface  of  these  lands 
ditches  are  veiy  readily  and  quickly  constructed.  In  this  way  a  number  of  canals 
for  the  distribution  of  Kings  River  water  have  been  constructed  on  the  east  and  west 
sides  of  the  main  channel  of  the  river.  Three  thousand  to  4,000  acres  of  land  are 
thus  served  with  water  at  the  highest  stages  of  the  river. 

KINGS   CANAL. 

This  canal  was  recently  constructed  by  the  Kings  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company. 
It  receives  water  from  one  of  the  high-water  channels  of  Kings  River  at  the  northern 
margin  of  the  lake  bed,  has  an  easterly  course  for  about  5  miles,  and  sends  several 
branches  in  a  southerly  direction  from  1  to  2  miles  into  the  area  once  covered  by  lake 
water.  The  canal  has  a  bed  width  of  about  60  feet  and  the  principal  laterals  have 
been  made  30  feet  wide. 

WEST   SIDE    CANAL. 

This  canal  takes  water  from  Kings  River  several  miles  north  of  the  old  lake 
margin,  has  .a  southwesterly  course  for  5  to  6  miles,  and  irrigates  lands  along  the 
western  margin  of  the  lake  bed.  This  canal  is  about  4-0  feet  wide. 

'CLAUSEN  &  BLAKELEY  CANAL. 

Another  west  side  canal  receiving  water  from  Kings  River  about  a  quarter  of  a 
mile  below  the  head  of  the  West  Side  Canal  is  the  Clausen  &  Blakeley  Canal.  It  ha? 
a  southwesterly  course  and  is  about  3  miles  long.  Its  width  is  about  60  feet. 


s 


LOVELACE    CANAL. 

This  canal  is  located  in  the  northern  portion  of  the  lake  bed  near  the  point  where 
the  waters  of  Kings  River  separate.  It  has  a  westerly  course  and  a  length  of  about 
1.5  miles. 

The  value  of  the  Tulare  Lake  lands  and  the  importance  of  the  canals  for  their 
irrigation  remains  to  be  demonstrated. 


"WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  305 

EMIGRANT  DITCH. 

This  canal  was  a  few  years  ago  classed  as  being  almost  out  of  service.  It  is  the 
uppermost  of  the  north  side  Kings  River  Canals  of  the  lower  group.  It  originally 
took  water  from  the  north  side  of  Cole  Slough,  about  2  miles  below  the  head  of  that 
arm  of  Kings  River,  and  still  receives  a  portion  of  the  water  to  which  it  is  entitled  from 
this  source.  (Fig.  15  B.)  Its  course  is  southwesterly,  nearly  parallel  with  Cole  Slough, 
for  about  :-i  miles,  thence  northwesterly  to  and  beyond  Wildflower.  The  canal  was 
constructed  by  an  organization  of  farmers  who  wanted  water  for  their  lands,  and  was 
to  be  managed  for  mutual  benefit.  The  interested  parties  formed  a  corporation 
late  in  1875,  with  a  capital  stock  of  $20,000,  in  shares  of  $1,000  each.  The  canal 
company  soon  became  involved  in  disastrous  litigation,  and  for  a  number  of  years  it 
appeared  as  though  it  would  be  denied  the  right  to  maintain  headworks  at  Cole 
Slough.  An  arrangement  was  made  by  the  canal  company  with  the  owners  of  the 
Fowler  Switch  Canal  under  which  the  main  canal  and  distributaries  of  the  P^migrant 
Ditch  Company  were  made  to  receive  and  distribute  Fowler  Switch  water.  When 
an  injunction  was  issued  by  the  courts  against  the  Fowler  Switch  Company,  restrain- 
ing it  from  taking  water  from  Kings  River,  a  portion  of  the  water  right  of  the 
Emigrant  Ditch  Company  was  floated  to  the  head  of  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal.  The 
water  taken  through  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal,  together  with  that  entering  the 
original  head  of  Emigrant  Ditch,  is  distributed  to  the  stockholders.  Each  stock- 
holder of  the  Emigrant  Ditch  Company  is  entitled  to  the  use  of  canal  water  in 
proportion  to  amount  of  stock  owned.  He  is  allowed  to  sell  or  rent  his  water  at 
pleasure.  Each  consumer  of  water  is  required  to  build  his  own  delivery  gate, 
subject  to  the  approval  of  the  directors.  The  distribution  of  water  is  in  charge  of 
a  canal  superintendent,  which  office  is  annually  let  to  the  lowest  bidder.  The  canal 
has  a  bed  width  of  about  16  feet,  and  delivers  its  water  to  a  number  of  branches, 
which  cover  about  7,000  acres.  The  capacity  of  the  Emigrant  Ditch  is  about  155 
cubic  feet  per  second. 

LIBERTY  CANAL. 

This  is  a  canal  which  was  constructed  about  1882  from  the  north  side  of 
Murphy  Slough,  its  head  being  about  5  miles  above  Riverdale.  After  experiencing 
much  trouble  in  obtaining  a  satisfactory  supply  of  water  from  Murphy  Slough,  which 
is  the  extension  of  Cole  Slough,  the  original  head  of  the  canal  was  abandoned  sev- 
eral years  ago,  and  the  canal  was  extended  easterly  about  7  miles  to  a  connection 
with  a  high-water  escape  way  from  Cole  Slough,  known  as  the  Sutherland  Canal. 
The  inflow  into  the  canal  is  controlled  by  a  regulator  placed  in  the  Sutherland  Canal 
about  one-eighth  of  a  mile  from  Cole  Slough.  (Fig.  15  C.)  The  canal  is  about  15  miles 
long,  has  a  westerly  course  for  7  miles  and  thence  a  northwesterly  course,  is  about  20 
feet  wide,  and  its  branches  cover  about  5,000  acres  to  the  north  of  Riverdale.  The 
amount  of  water  received  by  this  canal  is  controlled  by  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de 
Tache  Rancho.  Irrigators  from  it  have  never  felt  sure  of  receiving  the  necessary 
amount  of  water,  yet  have  at  times  received  enough,  or  rather  applied  enough  to  por- 
tions of  their  lands  to  permanently  injure  considerable  areas.  The  rising  of  the  water 
table  and  the  consequent  wetting  up  of  the  surface  soils  with  moisture  from  below,  has 
brought  alkali  in  undesirable  quantities  to  the  surface,  ruining  many  acres  of  land 
and  sometimes  proving  destructive  even  to  such  cultures  as  vineyards  and  orchards. 

23856— No.  100—01 2<> 


306  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

MURPHY  SLOUGH  ASSOCIATION. 

To  avoid  protracted  litigation  between  the  appropriators  of  water  from  Cole 
and  Murphy  .sloughs  (water  being  required  from  these  sloughs  for  the  irrigation  of 
lands  to  the  north  and  westward  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Banobo)  an  association  was 
formed,  which  was  substantially  in  the  nature  of  an  agreement  for  the  apportion- 
ment of  the  waters  of  Murphy  Slough.  Murphy  Slough  is  practically  a  westerly 
extension  of  Cole  Slough.  The  Murphy  Slough  Association  was  formed  in  1899,  and 
its  organization  was  participated  in  by  the  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho 
and  by  the  owners  of  the  Turner,  the  Millrace,  the  Reed,  the  Rivcrdale,  and  Burrell 
ditches.  According  to  this  agreement  the  water  of  Murphy  Slough,  until  the  same 
exceeds  300  cubic  feet  per  second,  is  divided  into  two  equal  parts,  one-half  going  to  the 
rancho,  the  other  half  to  be  divided  between  the  several  ditches  as  follows:  The  Turner 
Ditch  takes  one-sixth,  the  Millrace  one-third,  the  Reed  one-sixth,  and  the  Riverdale  and 
Burrell  ditches  one-third.  The  Murphy  Slough  Association  has  been  incorporated, 
and  the  agreement  as  to  the  apportionment  of  water  is  to  remain  in  force  five  years. 
This  agreement  has  to  the  present  time  been  quite  satisfactory,  and  the  general  opin- 
ion prevails  that  at  the  expiration  of  the  time  named  it  will  be  renewed.  A  superin- 
tendent is  appointed  by  the  association,  whose  duty  it  is  to  attend  to  the  proper 
apportionment  of  the  waters  of  the  slough. 

KILLRACE  CANAL. 

The  Millrace  Canal  was  constructed  in  1882.  It  really  consists  of  two  independ- 
ent canals,  one  upon  the  north  side  of  Murphy  Slough,  the  other  between  two  branches 
thereof,  both  controlled  by  the  same  corporation.  (Fig.  15  D.)  The  south  ditch  was 
built  a  short  time  before  the  north  ditch.  The  capacit_y  of  the  south  Milh-ace  is 
about  15  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  that  of  the  north  Millrace  is  about  60  cubic  feet 
per  second.  The  north  Millrace  has  a  northwesterly  course  and  a  length  of  about  12 
miles.  It  is  in  part  a  natural  channel,  and  has  a  number  of  branches  extending 
westerly  into  the  Fresno  Swamp  region. 

TURNER  DITCH. 

This  ditch  was  built  in  1875  to  carry  60  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  It  is 
reported  to  have  been  enlarged  in  1890  to  carry  90  cubic  feet  per  second.  Its  pres- 
ent capacity  is  about  50  to  60  cubic  feet  per  second.  It  is  one  of  the  ditches  receiving 
water  from  Murphy  Slough,  under  control  of  the  Murphy  Slough  Association,  and 
irrigates  lands  on  the  eastern  margin  of  Fresno  Swamp,  westward  from  the  Laguna 
de  Tache  Rancho.  (Fig.  15  E.) 

REED  DITCH. 

This  is  one  of  the  old  ditches  supplied  with  water  by  Kings  River.  Its  head  is  on 
the  north  side  of  Murphy  Slough,  about  4  miles  below  Riverdale.  (Fig.  15  F.)  It 
was  originally  a  small  private  ditch,  having  a  bed  width  of  about  5  feet  and  a  length 
of  about  4  miles,  irrigating  a  few  acres  of  land  near  Elkhorn.  It  was  enlarged  in 
1891,  and  its  ownei's  formed  a  corporation.  Its  present  capacity  is  estimated  at  about 
30  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  lands  it  irrigates  lie  along  the  eastern  margin  of  Fresno 
Swamp. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    KIVKR. 
RIVERDALE   DITCH. 


307 


The  Riverdale  Ditch  was  built  in  1875  and   is   owned  by  a  corporation.     It 
receives  water  from  the  south  channel  of  Murphy  Slough  through  a  headgate  used 


HEADWORKS 

OF 

A   Riverdale  and  Burrell  Ditches 
£  Crescent  Canal 
C    Stimson  Canal 

0          ••»••••-'•"        IVX 


FIG.  16.— A,  headworks  of  Riverdale  and  Bun-ell  ditches;   B,  headworks  of  Crescent  Canal;  C,  head  works  of  Stimson 

Canal. 

in  common  with  the  Burrell  Ditch.  (Fig.  16  A.)  Its  capacity  is  about  15  cubic  feet 
per  second,  its  bed  width  being  only  about  10  feet.  It  serves  a  small  area  in  the 
vicinity  of  Riverdale  with  water. 

BURRELL,  DITCH. 

This  ditch  has  a  common  head  with  the  Riverdale  Ditch.  (Fig.  16  B.)  It  was 
constructed  in  1890,  and  has  a  capacity  of  about  65  cubic  feet  per  second.  It  receives 
water  from  Murphy  Slough,  under  control  of  the  Murphy  Slough  Association. 


308  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

BOTJNDTBEE   DITCH. 

Just  below  the  Reed  Ditch,  also  upon  the  north  .side  of  Murphy  Slough,  is  :i 
small  ditch  known  as  the  Roundtree  Ditch.  It  was  constructed  in  1SS9.  It  is  a 
high-water  ditch,  generally  receiving  water  about  once  a  year  for  a  short  time,  and 
irrigates  a  small  area  of  grass  land.  Its  width  is  10  feet,  and  its  capacity  about  20 
cubic  feet  per  second.  It  is  reported  that  the  ditch  is  to  become  a  branch  or  lateral 
of  the  Reed  Ditch,  as  its  owner  is  one  of  the  stockholders  in  the  latter.  This  ditch 
has  not  joined  the  Murphy  Slough  Association,  its  owner  being  in  doubt  as  to  the, 
effect  which  this  step  might  have  upon  his  water  rights. 

LAGTJNA  DE  TACHE  BANCHO  CANALS. 

The  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  is  sometimes  also  referred  to  as  the  "River 
Ranch."  The  lands  combined  under  one  ownership  in  the  River  Ranch  have  an  area 
of  about  68,000  acres.  It  embraces  within  its  boundaries  nearly  all  of  the  delta 
lands  of  Kings  River  northward  from  the  main  stream.  A  main  canal  has  been  con- 
structed for  the  irrigation  of  the  greater  part  of  this  ranch,  and  is  known  as  the 
Laguna  de  Tache  Canal  or  the  Grant  Canal.  A  large  portion  of  this  ranch  is 
annually  submerged  during  the  high  stages  of  Kings  River.  The  area  subject  to 
such  flooding  has,  however,  been  considerably  reduced  by  the  construction  of  a 
north-side  river  levee  along  a  portion  of  the  ranch  frontage.  There  are  a  number 
of  north-side  delta  channels  which  break  out  from  the  main  stream  within  this  ranch, 
most  of  which  have  westerly  courses  toward,  the  valley  trough.  The  history  of 
these,  as  related  by  local  residents,  is  not  without  interest.  The  present  head  of 
Cole  Slough  is  a  waterway  made  by  the  freshets  of  IHUl-iW.  It  was  enlarged  and 
deepened  by  subsequent  high  waters.  Cole  Slough  is  the  principal  north-side  delta 
channel.  Its  waters  are  carried  westward  by  the  several  branches  of  Murphy 
Slough,  and  finally  reach  the  upper  portion  of  Fresno  Swamp,  through  which  they 
are  carried  in  a  network  of  channels,  as  frequently  found  in  tide  swamps,  to  Fresno 
Slough  and  San  Joaquin  River,  many  miles  northwestward.  Before  1862  Cole 
Slough  received  water  from  the  river  through  a  channel  known  as  the  Arroyo  de 
Hotansas,  the  head  of  which  was  about  a  quarter  of  a  mile  below  the  present  head  of 
the  slough.  This  channel  was  about  3  miles  long.  Until  1869  Cole  Slough  occupied 
a  channel  which  at  a  point  about  3  miles  in  a  direct  line  above  Kingston  was  less 
than  a  quarter  of  a  mile  from  Kings  River,  but  in  that  year  Mr.  St.  John,  one  of 
the  owners  of  the  ranch,  made  a  small  ditch  westward  from  the  north  slough  bank 
about  6  miles  below  its  head.  This  ditch  was  enlarged  by  the  next  high  water;  it 
lost  the  appearance  of  a  ditch,  and  is  now  called  St.  Johns  Channel  or  New  Cole 
Slough.  It  reunites  3  miles  below  its  head  with  the  original  slough  channel  at  a 
point  also  known  as  the  head  of  Murphy  Slough. 

A  small  ditch,  constructed  in  1868  by  a  settler  known  as  Dutch  John,  connecting 
Kings  River  with  Cole  Slough  at  the  point  where  the  two  channels  were  nearest 
together  had  meanwhile  also  been  converted  into  a  capacious  water  course,  and  has 
since  been  known  as  the  Dutch  John  Cut.  In  the  same  winter,  1868-69,  the  river 
broke  through  the  barrier  separating  it  from  Murphy  Slough  at  a  point  about  3  miles 
(by  river)  below  the  Dutch  John  Cut  and  formed  Reynolds  Slough,  which  is  about 
one-half  mile  long. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  309 

The  main  Grant  Canal  was  constructed  in  1873.  Water  was  diverted  for  it  from 
Murphy  Slough,  near  Reynolds  Slough,  which  latter  was  permanently  closed  by 
means  of  a  dam.  Two  years  later,  by  permission  of  the  owners  of  the  Grant,  a  new 
connection  between  Cole  Slough,  half  a  mile  above  the  head  of  Grant  Canal,  and 
Murphy  Slough,  nearly  the  same  distance  below  the  canal,  was  made  by  settlers  who 
were  desirous  of  increasing  the  flow  of  water  in  the  channels  reaching  the  vicinity  of 
Klkhorn.  Its  projectors  subsequently  filed  a  claim  to  water  and  incorporated,  under 
the  name  of  the  Vanderbilt  Canal  Company.  Settlers  in  the  vicinity  of  Riverdale 
and  Elkhorn  claim  that  the  original  cut  was  entirely  artificial,  while  owners  of  the 
Grant  claim  that  the  cut  is  merely  the  result  of  cleaning  out  the  head  of  a  natural 
water  course.  After  the  Vanderbilt  Cut  had  become  one  of  the  channels  for  Cole 
Slough  water,  the  Grant  Canal  was  extended  upstream  across  Murphy  Slough  to  the 
Vanderbilt  Cut,  from  which  it  has  ever  since  taken  its  water.  The  turning  of  the 
flow  of  Cole  Slough  into  the  Vanderbilt  Cut  is  accomplished  by  means  of  a  dam  of 
earth  across  the  old  south  channel.  From  the  cut  water  is  turned  into  the  head  of 
the  canal  by  means  of  a  second  earth  dam,  and,  flowing  in  the  canal,  it  crosses  Murphy 
Slough  between  two  dams,  of  which  the  lower  or  westerly  one  is  an  overfall  dam  of 
brush  work,  serving  as  a  waste  for  surplus  waters  and  feeding  the  lower  sections  of 
Murphy  Slough. 

The  Laguna  de  Tache  Canal  has  a  westerly  course  along  the  northern  bank  of 
the  main  channel  of  Kings  River,  from  which  it  is  generally  less  than  one-half  mile 
distant.  At  5£  miles  below  its  head  it  crosses  a  water  course  known  as  the  James 
Canal  on  an  earthen  dam,  and  its  direction  becomes  southerly.  It  reaches  the  river 
hank  within  a  mile  and  closely  follows  it  southerly  for  about  a  mile  farther,  crossing 
and  closing  the  head  of  another  delta  channel  of  Kings  River  known  as  Old  North 
Fork.  The  upper  section  of  the  main  canal  for  a  distance  of  about  4  mHes  from  its 
head  has  a  bed  width  of  about  30  feet  and  carries  water  2  to  2.5  feet  deep.  The 
distributaries  from  the  main  canal  are  for  the  most  part  natural  channels,  many  of 
which  have  long  ago  ceased  to  serve  as  delta  channels  and  are  mere  swales  on  tops 
of  low  ridges. 

The  James  Canal  is  a  channel  of  more  recent  formation,  which  has  been  utilized 
as  a  distributing  ditch.  By  permission  of  the  owners  of  the  grant,  a  gate  for  the 
control  of  its  flow  was  put  into  this  channel  in  1880.  It  was  washed  out  by  the  next 
freshet  and  was  replaced  in  1881,  but  was  again  destroyed.  Thereupon  the  owners 
of  the  grant  permanently  closed  this  channel  with  the  embankment  of  earth  on  which 
the  canal  is  carried  across.  The  head  of  Old  North  Fork,  which  is  another  distribu- 
tary of  canal  water,  was  closed  as  early  as  1865  by  Messrs.  Sutherland  &  Mann. 

One  of  the  most  important  of  the  lower  river  north-side  delta  channels  is  the  Zalda 
Canal,  which,  throughout  its  lower  sections  is  generally  known  as  the  North  Fork  of 
Kings  River.  It  is  daimed  that  the  head  of  this  channel  is  the  enlargement  by  flood 
waters  of  a  ditch  constructed  in  1872  by  settlers  living  to  the  west  of  the  grant. 
This  channel  was  reported  closed  for  a  time  by  a  dam  at  the  river  about  1885.  It 
was  at  that  time  proposed  to  utilize  this  channel  as  one  of  the  distributaries  of  water 
from  the  Grant  Canal.  The  course  of  North  Fork  is  westward  in  a  very  direct  line 
toward  Summit  Lake,  but  before  the  lake  is  reached  its  main  channel  swerves  north- 
ward into  Fresno  Swamp.  The  portion  of  the  Kings  River  delta  between  the  main 


310  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

river  on  the  south  and  the  Zalda  Canal  on  the  north  marks  the  very  flat  summit 
between  Tulare  Lake  and  Fresno  Swamp.  In  the  trough  of  the  valley,  near  and  to 
the  south  of  Summit  Lake,  the  general  elevation  of  the  ground's  surface  on  this  sum- 
mit, the  lowest  point  on  the  border  of  Tulare  Lake,  is  about  214  feet  above  mean  sea 
level.  During  the  last  high  stage  of  the  lake,  in  1868,  the  depth  of  water  over  the 
general  surface  of  the  country  at  this  point  was  about  6  feet. 

The  lands  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  have  always  been  so  well  watered  that 
the  irrigation  works  which  have  been  constructed  may  be  regarded  as  serving  pri- 
marily to  establish  a  convenient  control  of  the  water  rather  than  as  works  intended 
to  increase  the  supply.  To  prevent  excessive  natural  inundation  it  has  been  found 
necessary  to  erect  embankments  along  the  river;  also  to  construct  numerous  drain 
ditches  from  low  tracts  into  natural  channels  to  facilitate  drainage.  The  main  irri- 
gation canal  supplies  water  to  a  large  number  of  distributaries,  frequently  natural 
channels,  and  these  in  turn  to  small  irrigating  ditches,  usually  200  to  450  yards  apart. 
As  the  entire  irrigation  system  lies  within  the  limits  of  the  rancho,  there  has  been 
less  study  of  methods  of  controlling  and  distributing  water  than  would  have  been  the 
case  if  a  large  number  of  consumers  had  to  be  supplied,  and  water  measurement  has 
been  entirely  out  of  the  question. 

The  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  has  within  the  last  few  years  become  the  property 
of  the  same  parties  who  control  the  Fresno  Canal.  The  future  of  'both  properties 
was  kept  in  mind  when  the  owners  of  the  Grant  sold  Kings  River  water  to  the  Sunset 
Irrigation  District,  to  be  diverted,  by  way  of  Cole  Slough  into  the  enlarged  Grant 
Canal,  thence  across  the  Zalda  Canal  (North  Fork)  to  a  proposed  reservoir  near 
Summit  Lake.  According  to  the  terms  of  this  agreement  the  district  is  given  a  right 
of  way  and  a  "reservoir  site,  and  water  is  sold  to  it  to  the  extent  of  3,500  cubic  feet 
per  second,  subject  to  the  prior  rights  of  the  owners  of  the  rancho  and  of  the  Fresno 
Canal,  to  the  extent  of  3,000  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  subject  also  to  the  proviso 
that,  for  use  on  the  ranch,  500  cubic  feet  per  second  may  be  taken  out  of  the  main 
canal  of  the  district.  The  price  paid  by  the  irrigation  district  was  $250,000  in  district 
bonds,  and  the  aggregate  amount  of  land  in  reservoir  sites  and  right  of  way  for  the 
canal  was  not  to  exceed  2,200  acres.  As  Sunset  Irrigation  District  has  been  declared 
illegally  organized,  this  agreement  has  lost  its  force  and  the  bonds  delivered  have 
lost  their  value.  The  owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  have  always  strenu- 
ously objected  to  the  diversion  of  water  from  Kings  River  so  long  as  their  own  needs 
were  not  fully  met.  The  many  lawsuits  instituted  have  led  to  agreements  with  the 
various  canal  companies,  particularly  with  those  receiving  their  water  supplies  from 
Murphy  Slough.  The  agreement  entered  into  with  these  canal  owners  led  to  the 
formation  of  the  Murphy  Slough  Association,  which  has  already  been  referred  to. 

CRESCENT   CANAL. 

This  canal  was  constructed  in  1885  and  1886,  and  came  into  use  in  1887  for  the 
irrigation  of  lands  on  the  western  edge  of  the  extreme  southern  portion  of  Fresno 
Swamp.  The  head  of  the  canal  is  on  the  south  side  of  North  Fork,  about  a  mile  to 
the  north  of  Summit  Lake.  The  canal,  which  is  about  8  miles  long,  has  a  westerly 
course  for  about  1.5  miles,  thence  northwesterly,  following  a  grade  line  with  a  fall 
of  6  inches  to  the  mile.  It  was  originally  made  50  feet  wide  near  its  head;  it  was  25 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  311 

feet  wide  several  miles  below  and  50  wide  feet  in  its  lower  sections.  The  narrow 
section  was  cut  to  the  full  width  in  18H2.  It  was  planned  to  carry  water  3  feet  deep. 
The  canal  is  owned  by  a  company  incorporated  in  September,  1885,  whose  capital 
was  fixed  at  $75,000,  in  150  shares,  of  which  29.5  were  issued.  The  cost  of  the  original 
canal  works  is  reported  to  have  been  $33,120.  The  canal  construction  was  for  the 
benefit  of  its  stockholders  and  for  the  irrigation  of  their  lands,  and  not  for  the  sale 
of  water.  In  1899  the  canal  was  extended  upstream  about  2  miles  to  effect  a  better 
control  of  the  water  at  its  head.  This  extension  is  reported  to  have  cost  $5,600. 
Each  share  of  stock  entitles  its  holder  to  water  for  the  irrigation  of  320  acres. 
After  all  stockholders  have  been  supplied  with  water  the  surplus  is  sold  at  the  rate 
of  75  cents  per  acre  per  irrigation.  About  9,400  acres  are  reported  to  be  under 
i  rrigation.  Individual  stockholders  are  allowed  to  dispose  of  the  water  to  which  they 
are  entitled.  The  rental  price  of  water  obtained  from  stockholders  is  generally  from 
$100  to  $200  per  share  of  stock  per  season.  Canal  expenses  are  met  by  levying 
assessments  upon  the  stock.  The  estimated  cost  of  delivering  water  is  25  to  40  cents 
per  acre  irrigated.  The  owners  of  the  canal  have  been  and  are  involved  in  litiga- 
tion with  the  owners  of  the  Stimson  and  the  James  canals  and  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache 
Rancho.  In  litigation  with  the  owners  of  the  Stimson  Canal  the  Crescent  Canal  was 
awarded  I'U!  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second.  It  is  reported  that  this  awarding  is 
acknowledged  in  all  agreements  between  the  Crescent  Canal  owners  and  the  owners  of 
the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho.  The  original  regulator  or  canal  headgate  had  a  width 
of  50  feet.  It  was  a  light,  simple  structure,  weighted  on  top  with  a  filling  of  earth. 
The  new  headgate  is  well  made  of  light  timber.  It  is  40  feet  wide,  divided  into  10 
openings  by  vertical  posts,  openings  between  posts  being  closed  with  loose  flash- 
boards.  The  estimated  capacity  of  the  canal  is  about  406  cubic  feet  per  second. 

STIMSON  CANAL. 

The  Stimson  Canal  is  owned  by  the  Stimson  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company, 
which  was  incorporated  in  February,  1891.  The  canal  was  constructed  in  1889,  at  a 
cost  of  about  $23,000.  This  canal  irrigates  some  of  the  reclaimed  lands  of  Fresno 
Swamp.  It  diverts  water  from  one  of  the  high-water  channels  flowing  in  a  southerly 
direction  through  this  swamp,  being  the  same  channel — Bogg  Slough — which  supplies 
water  to  Crescent  Canal.  (Fig.  16  C.)  An  agreement  has  been  reached  between  the 
two  canal  companies  under  which  a  partition  of  waters  is  effected  at  the  head  of  the 
'Crescent  Canal.  Under  this  agreement  the  Crescent  Canal  receives  213  cubic  feet  per 
second  and  the  Stimson  Canal  165  cubic  feet  per  second.  In  an  agreement  with  the 
owners  of  the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho  the  right  of  the  Stimson  Canal  to  185  cubic  feet 
per  second  is  recognized.  The  area  irrigated  by  the  canal  has  been  reported  at  14,000 
acres.  Its  capacity  is  about  120  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  cost  of  canal  mainte- 
nance is  reported  to  be  about  $650  per  year.  Water  is  apportioned  to  stockholders 
or  to  persons  who  have  rented  stock  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  shares  held. 
Surplus  waters  have  at  times  been  rented  at  the  rate  of  50  cents  per  acre  per  irriga- 
tion. The  estimated  cost  per  acre  of  effecting  a  delivery  of  water  to  the  land  to  be 
irrigated  is  25  to  40  cents.  The  structure  in  Bogg  Slough  at  the  head  of  Crescent 
Canal  serving  to  control  the  partition  waters  was  built  at  the  expense  of  the 
Stimson  Canal  Company.  It  serves  as  a  weir  in  the  slough.  Its  width  is  48  feet,  and 


312  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

it  is  reported  to  have  cost  $1,100.  The  weir  or  gate  in  Bogg  Slough  at  the  head  of 
Stimson  Canal  is  a  massive  structure,  54  feet  wide,  erected  at  a  cost  of  $2,000,  and 
was  built  in  1897.  The  canal  headgate  was  originally  a  light  structure  that  cost 
about  $400;  it  was  washed  out  in  June,  1894:,  and  replaced  by  a  new  gate,  40  feet 
wide,  at  a  cost  of  about  $600. 

CALAMITY  DITCH. 

The  Calamity  Ditch  was  constructed  in  1894.  It  is  a  high-water  ditch  about  16 
feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  having  its  headgate  located  near  the  edge  of  the  swamp 
and  overflow  land  about  a  mile  to  the  northward  of  Summit  Lake  and  just  south  of 
Crescent  Canal.  The  ditch  has  a  northwesterly  course,  is  several  miles  in  length, 
and  supplies  water  for  about  1,500  acres  of  land.  Its  cost  of  construction  is  reported 
at  $1,000,  and  the  annual  expense  of  maintenance  $100.  Water  is  generally  available 
from  the  beginning  of  May  to  the  end  of  July.  The  ditch  is  owned  by  the  land- 
owners whose  farms  are  served  with  water  by  it. 

HITE  DITCH. 

The  Hite  Ditch  was  originally  constructed  as  a  branch  of  Stimson  Canal,  but 
owing  to  the  unreliable  flow  of  water  in  Stimson  Canal,  due  largely  to  litigation  with 
the  owners  of  the  Crescent  Canal,  an  independent  diversion  of  water  was  effected  by 
the  irrigate rs  whose  lands  were  served  by  the  Hite  branch.  The  ditch  was  con- 
structed several  years  ago.  It  has  a  headgate  9  feet  in  width,  placed  in  the  reclama- 
tion levee  on  the  west  side-  of  Eogg  Slough,  near  the  point  where  the  Stimson 
Canal  receives  its  water.  This  ditch  receives  water  only  for  a  short  period  each 
year,  and  irrigates  about  500  acres  of  the  reclaimed  lands  in  Fresno  Swamp.  The 
ditch  is  but  poorly  maintained,  and  is  reported  to  have  a  capacity  of  15  to  20  cubic 
feet  per  second. 

JAMES  EAST  SIDE  CANAL. 

The  James  East  Side  Canal  receives  its  water  from  the  eastern  side  of  Murphy 
Slough,  just  above  the  head  of  Steamboat  Slough,  which  is  one  of  the  water  courses 
of  the  Fresno  Swamp  region.  It  has  a  northwesterly  course  for  a  distance  of  about 
15  miles,  skirting  the  easterly  edge  of  the  submersible  lands  of  Fresno  Swamp.  The 
canal  was  constructed  by  J.  G.  James  in  the  fall  of  1885.  It  was  made  10  feet  wide 
on  the  bottom  and  to  carry  water  2  feet  in  depth;  width  and  depth  have  been  gradu- 
ally increased  to  a  present  bed  width  of  20  feet  and  a  depth  of  4  feet.  Water  is 
admitted  into  the  head  of  the  canal  without  being  tinder  control  of  a  check  weir  or 
headgate,  and  parts  of  the  canal  have  assumed  the  appearance  of  a  natural  water- 
way. Water  from  this  canal  is  used  only  for  grass-land  irrigation.  It  is  reported 
that  as  much  as  5,000  acres  have  been  irrigated  in  one  season.  The  canal  capacity 
has  been  estimated  at  75  cubic  feet  per  second. 

JAMES  WEST  SIDE  CANAL. 

The  James  West  Side  Canal  was  constructed  in  1892-93  by  J.  G.  James  along 
the  western  margin  of  the  Fresno  Swamp  lands.  The  point  at  which  it  diverts 
water  from  one  of  the  Fresno  Swamp  sloughs  is  about  8  miles  below  the  point  at 
which  the  East  Side  Canal  receives  its  water.  In  1889  the  original  West  Side  Canal 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  813 

was  paralleled  by  a  second  canal  receiving  water  through  the  same  headgate  which 
supplies  water  to  the  former.  The  second  canal  occupies  a  position  about  onc- 
quarter  to  one-half  mile  farther  west  than  the  original  one.  Each  of  these  canals 
has  a  length  of  about  10  miles;  bed  widths  are  reported  at  40  feet  and  depths  at  3.5 
feet.  About  2,000  acres  of  land  can  be  irrigated  from  these  canals.  It  is  reported 
that  about  12,000  acres  have  been  served  with  water.  The  crops  irrigated  are  prin- 
cipally wheat  and  corn,  water  being  delivered  to  tenants  of  the  land  free.  The,  tenants 
are,  however,  required  to  keep  the  canal  in  repair. 

PUMP  IRRIGATION  FROM  FRESNO  SLOUGH. 

The  main  slough  draining  Fresno  Swamp  and  uniting  with  the  San  .Joaquin 
River  at  Las  Juntas  is  known  as  the  Fresno  Slough.  When  Kings  River  is  in  flood 
and  the  delta  branches  flowing  northward  carry  water  into  Fresno  Swamp  there  is 
a  considerable  discharge  through  this  slough  into  San  Joaquin  River,  but  there  are 
times  when  Kings  River  contributes  no  water  to  this  slough,  its  water  being  then 
dead  or  without  current  and  kept  at  the  ordinary  summer  stage  by  contributions 
from  San  Joaquin  River,  whose  flow  is  checked  just  below  Las  Juntas  by  the  clam 
or  weir  of  the  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company.  On 
this  slough,  at  points  about  8  to  12  miles  above  Las  Juntas,  are  four  pumping  plants 
which  have  recently  been  put  into  service  for  the  irrigation  of  lands  upon  either 
side  of  the  slough.  As  the  banks  of  the  slough  are  very  low  and  the  lands  extending 
away  from  the  banks  upon  either  side  thereof  are  very  flat  the  cost  of  thus  pump- 
ing water  is  very  low  and  the  irrigation  of  large  areas  of  land  is  readily  affected. 

WHITESIDE  PUMP. 

The  Whiteside  Pump  is  the  uppermost  plant  located  on  Fresno  Slough.  It  was 
installed  in  1899.  Power  is  supplied  to  a  16-inch  centrifugal  pump  by  a  60- 
horsepower  portable  engine.  Water  is  raised  only  4  to  10  feet,  according  to  the 
stage  of  water  in  Fresno  Slough.  It  is  delivered  into  a  ditch  having  a  width  of  10 
feet  and  irrigates  about  1,500  acres  of  land  on  the  southwest  side  of  Fresno  Slough. 
The  plant  is  maintained  and  operated  by  the  tenants  of  the  land  irrigated. 

MITCHLER  PUMP. 

The  Mitchler  Pump  is  located  about  a  mile  below  the  Whiteside  Pump,  on  the 
opposite  bank  of  Fresno  Slough.  The  26-inch  centrifugal  pump  at  this  station  is 
driven  by  a  150-horsepower  stationary  engine  and  delivers  water  into  a  ditch  30  feet 
in  width.  It  is  claimed  that  about  7,000  acres  of  land  have  been  irrigated  with  this 
pump  at  a  cost  of  25  cents  per  acre.  The  cost  of  the  plant  is  reported  at  $8,000.  It 
was  constructed  in  1899  and  is  operated  by  the  tenants  of  the  lands  irrigated. 

THE  LEE  PUMP. 

The  Lee  Pump,  which  also  draws  water  from  Fresno  Slough,  is  located  upon  its 
westerly  bank,  a  little  over  a  mile  below  the  Mitchler  Pump.  The  16-inch  centrif- 
ugal pump  at  this  station  is  driven  by  a  40-horsepower  movable  engine.  About 
1,500  acres  of  land  are  reported  to  have  been  irrigated  with  its  water  at  a  cost  of  20 
cents  per  acre.  The  water  is  delivered  into  a  ditch  having  a  width  of  15  feet.  The 
plant  was  installed  in  1898. 


314  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

BORLAND  PUMP. 

The  Borland  Pump  is  located  on  a  small  west-side  branch  of  Fresno  Slough, 
about  1.5  miles  below  the  Lee  Pump.  This  plant  was  installed  in  1899  at  a  cost  of 
about  $8,000.  The  26-inch  centrifugal  pump  i.s  driven  by  a  150-horsepower  engine. 
Two  thousand  acres  are  irrigated  with  its  water  at  a  cost  of  30  to  35  cents  per  acre. 
The  owner  of  this  plant  is  involved  in  litigation  with  the  owners  of  the  San  Joaquin 
and  Kings  River  Canal,  who  claim  that  the  taking  of  water  from  Fresno  Slough  for 
irrigation  purposes  is  adverse  to  their  interests. 

The  irrigation  accomplished  by  the  several  pumping  plants  just  enumerated  is 
supplemented  by  a  fifth  portable  plant,  which  is  put  in  service  at  any  point  of  the 
slough  where  most  required. 

METHODS   AND   PRACTICE   OF   IRRIGATION. 

Of  the  Kings  River  canals  only  one  is  owned  by  an  irrigation  district.  One  is 
owned  by  a  corporation  whose  canal  interests  are  entirely  separate  and  distinct  from 
the  ownership  of  the  land  irrigated. 

The  rest  of  the  canals  are  owned  by  companies  or  corporations  whose  stock  is 
for  the  most  part  in  the  hands  of  the  landowners.  The  stock  in  such  cases  generally 
represents  a  proportional  interest  in  the  water,  and  the  stockholder  becomes  a  pre- 
ferred user  of  the  water.  Sometimes  the  canal  company  sells  surplus  water  to  land- 
owners who  hold  no  stock;  sometimes  the  individual  stockholder  is  permitted  to  sell 
his  surplus  in  this  way.  This  practice  occasionally  disturbs  the  reliability  of  service, 
as  it  occasionally  results  in  the  call  for  more  water  through  a  canal  branch  than  it 
can  supply. 

The  irrigation  works  on  Kings  River  are  throughout  of  a  cheap  but  effective 
character,  serving  their  purpose  fairly  well,  Hut  typical  in  a  measure  of  the  unsettled 
conditions  relating  to  the  rights  to  use  water.  Permanent  structures  are  practically 
unknown.  The  dams  in  the  main  channel  of  the  river — the  designation  "weir" 
would  perhaps  be  more  appropriate — are  constructed  of  cobbles  and  brush,  repaired 
as  may  be  necessary  after  each  freshet  (PI.  XXVII).  The  water  not  diverted  flows 
over  these  and  they  are  frequently  cut  out  in  whole  or  in  part  during  the  flood  stages 
of  the  river,  but  are  easily  replaced.  Water  apportionment  to  the  several  canals 
would  be  greatly  facilitated  if  there  were  fewer  points  of  diversion;  if,  for  instance, 
the  canals  of  each  group  could  be  served  through  a  common  trunk  canal.  The  canal 
gates  throughout  are  timber  structures;  some  of  heavy,  some  of  very  light  materials. 
A  well-constructed  gate  serves  six  to  ten  years  and  is  so  inexpensive  and  easily 
adjusted  to  varying  requirements  that  it  will  probably  be  long  before  any  masonry 
structures  will  be  seen  on  the  river. 

T^ere  is  not  a  ca'nal  or  ditch  on  the  river  which  has  yet  introduced  a  careful  sys- 
tem of  water  measurement,  or  even  of  apportionment,  to  irrigators.  This  is  due  to 
several  causes.  In  the  first  place,  water  is  not  sold  as  an  ordinary  commodity. 
In  every  canal,  even  when  the  quantity  to.be  delivered  is  specifically  named,  the 
unit  of  measurement  represents  only  a  proportional  part  of  the  flow  of  the  canal, 
based  on  the  number  of  shares  of  stock  owned  or  rented,  on  the  number  of  water 
rights  held,  or  upon  the  area  to  be  served  with  water.  This  apportionment  is  not 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bu!.  100,  Office  of  Expl.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXVII. 


o 

c 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  315 

carefully  made,  hut  is  left  to  the  good  judgment  of  a  canal  superintendent,  who  gen- 
erally manages  to  give  irrigators  all  they  want  in  times  of  abundant  flow,  and  who 
stands  them  off  as  best  he  can  when  water  is  scarce.  In  the  second  place,  there  is 
very  little  call  for  water  measurement  in  a  district  like  the  Mussel  Slough  country, 
where  irrigation  progresses  without  application  of  the  water  to  the  surface  of  the 
soil.  Crops  may  be  benefited  as  much,  or  even  more,  by  the  water  sinking  from 
ditches  in  adjacent  tracts  as  by  that  brought  to  the  land  under  cultivation;  the  same 
is  true  of  some  districts  near  Fresno,  where  ground  water  has  risen  so  near  the  sur- 
face as  to  make  the  application  of  water  to  the  surface  unnecessarv.  The  system  of 
apportioning  water  has  led  to  the  adoption  of  methods  of  regulation  by  means  of 
gates  with  water  flowing  through  submerged  orifices,  or  others  with  a  clear  overfall, 
giving  the  irrigator  reasonable  assurance  of  fair  treatment.  Such  measurement  is, 
however,  only  intended  to  be  relative.  When  a  number  of  irrigators  receive  water 
through  a  common  private  ditch  they  arrange  among  themselves  how  it  shall  be 
apportioned  as  to  time  and  quantity. 

Very  often  the  owners  of  adjoining  tracts  of  land  enter  jointly  upon  the  construc- 
tion of  laterals  from  some  main  canal,  and  the  affairs  of  these  laterals  are  managed  in 
a  manner  very  similar  to  those  of  independent  canals.  The  Enterprise  Canal  was 
originally  of  this  type.  It  was  constructed  as  a  branch  of  the  Fresno  and  Kings 
River  Canal,  but  is  now  considered  a  branch  of  Fresno  Canal.  Others  are  the  Hern- 
don  Canal,  Hansen  Ditch,  Central  Colon}*-  Canal,  Washington  Colony  Canal,  Briggs- 
Canal,  Malaga  Extension  Ditch,  Garfield  Ditch,  McCall  Ditch,  Highland  Ditch, 
Bethel  Ditch,  Kirby  Ditch,  Wristen  Ditch,  Iowa  Ditch,  Harlan  and  Stevens  Ditch, 
Caruthers  Ditch,  Wildflower  Ditch,  Webber  Ditch,  and  others. 

The  methods  of  irrigation  as  practiced  in  the  various  districts  served  with  Kings 
River  water  are  fairly  well  adapted  to  local  requirements.  Physical  conditions,  char- 
acter of  soils,  the  originally  extremely  dry  condition  of  the  plain  lands,  as  well  as  the 
subdivision  of  land  into  very  small  holdings,  were  the  prime  factors  which  determined 
the  methods  of  applying  water  to  land  on  the  plains  or  uplands  upon  both  sides  of 
Kings  River.  The  ease  with  which  an  elevation  of  the  ground  water  could  be  con- 
trolled in  the  delta  region,  particularly  toward  the  south,  in  the  so-called  Mussel  Slough 
country,  very  naturally  led  to  the  adoption  of  a  method  of  irrigation  in  that  region 
which  has  remained  peculiar  to  itself.  Irrigation  is  here  accomplished  by  leading 
water  into  small  irrigating  ditches,  generally  100  to  200  yards  apart,  in  which  it  is 
allowed  to  flow  sluggishly  until  enough  water  has  found  its  way  through  the  surface 
and  into  the  subsoils  to  saturate  them  with  water  and  bring  the  ground  water  plane 
to  within  a  few  feet  of  the  surface  soil.  When  moisture  is  thus  brought  within  reach 
of  the  roots  of  grain,  alfalfa,  trees,  or  vines,  irrigation  is  complete  for  the  season. 
This  occurs  at  the  time  when  the  available  supply  from  the  river  is  about  exhausted. 
Due  to  evaporation  from  the  surface  of  the  soils,  the  consumption  of  moisture  by 
plant  life,  and  the  sinking  of  the  soil  water  into  deeper  porous  strata,  the  surface  of 
the  ground  water  falls  lower  and  lower,  until  at  the  beginning  of  the  next  irrigating 
season  it  is  from  6  to  12  feet  below  the  ground's  surface.  Under  this  sj'stem 
of  irrigation  the  movement  of  moisture  throughout  the  great  body  of  the  surface 
soil  is  upward.  The  water  which  thus  moves  from  below  to  the  surface  brings  with 
it  more  or  less  of  alkaline  salts,  which,  when  water  evaporates  at  the  surface  of  the 


316  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

soil,  often  accumulate  in  undesirable  quantity.  The  extent  to  which  lands  in  the 
delta  region  of  Kings  River  have  through  this  cause  been  deteriorating  is  often 
remarked,  but  as  yet  no  steps  seem  to  have  been  taken  to  correct  the  evil.  Many 
examples  of  such  deleterious  effect  upon  the  soils  are  found  on  the  north  side  of  the 
river  as  well  as  on  the  south. 

Near  Fresno,  where  the  original  holdings  of  land  wen-  small  and  where  the 
quantity  of  water  available  for  irrigation  was  also  small  in  proportion  to  the  demand, 
it  was  quite  natural  that  unusual  effort  should  have  been  made  to  thoroughly  prepare 
the  land  for  irrigation  before  applying  the  water.  It  became  customary  to  subdivide 
fields  into  small,  rectangular  tracts,  often  only  one-quarter  acre  or  less  in  area,  and 
to  make  the  surface  of  those  tracts  perfectly  smooth  and  level.  Each  rectangular 
plat  of  ground  was  surrounded  by  a  low  embankment,  and  irrigation  was  effected  In- 
flooding  its  surface.  Irrigation  was  complete  as  soon  as  water  covered  the  entire 
plat.  Any  excess  of  water  was  allowed  to  sink  into  the  soil.  During  the  first  years 
of  irrigation  near  Fresno,  while  the  soils  and  subsoils  were  very  dry  and  ground 
water  was  at  depths  of  from  30  to  60  feet  below  the  surface,  the  quantity  of  water 
absorbed  was  sometimes  far  in  excess  of  what  would  ordinarily  be  considered  pos- 
sible. Five  feet  of  vertical  depth  were  occasionally  applied  at  a  single  irrigation. 
The  quantity  of  water  put  upon  a  single  plat  during  a  season  would  occasionally  be 
equivalent  to  a  depth  over  all  of  20  feet.  This  system  of  flooding  in  small  rectangu- 
lar tracts  was  gradually  modified  to  a  system  of  furrow  irrigation.  Furrows  were 
also  used  to  a  considerable  extent  in  irrigating  grain  land  and  orchards,  irrigation  in 
such  cases  being  effected  by  turning  the  water  into  deep  plow  furrows  which,  accord- 
ing to  the  amount  of  surface  fall  of  the  ground,  were  carried  in  a  direction  of  greatest 
slope,  or  quartering  across  the  same  in  cases  when  velocities  along  lines  of  greatest 
slope  would  cause  too  great  erosion.  To  some  extent  the  method  of  irrigating  in 
contour  checks  came  into  use,  but  it  has  not  found  general  favor,  the  irrigating  heads 
being  generally  too  small  to  use  this  system  to  advantuge.  The  application  of  water 
to  land  commences  each  season  in  March,  or  as  soon  thereafter  as  the  canals  are  well 
supplied  with  water.  At  this  time  water  is  applied  to  grain  lands,  to  orchards,  and 
to  vineyards.  The  irrigation  of  alfalfa  usually  begins  a  month  later.  One  irrigation 
is  ordinarily  considered  ample  for  orchards  and  vineyards,  but  when  spring  rains  are 
scant  and  the  soil  has  not  been  thoroughly  wet  by  winter  rains,  irrigations  are 
repeated  if  water  is  available.  Alfalfa  is  genei'ally  irrigated  once  for  each  crop  cut, 
the  number  of  waterings  it  receives  per  year  being  generally  3  to  5.  Very  little 
grain  land  is  irrigated  by  application  of  water  to  the  surface.  This  is  generally  done 
only  when  it  appears  possible  thereby  to  save  a  crop  which  it  was  hoped  would 
mature  without  irrigation. 

The  large  volume  of  water  which  is  annually  diverted  from  Kings  River  and 
sinks,  from  the  many  irrigation  canals  and  from  branches  and  the  small  irrigating 
ditches  and  through  soils  flooded  into  the  subsurface  strata,  has  gradually  saturated 
the  subsoils  and  brought  the  ground  water  so  near  the  surface  of  the  ground  that  it 
has  become  necessary  in  many  localities  to  construct  works  for  drainage.  Numerous 
examples  of  this  kind  can  be  cited.  A  notable  example  is  in  the  region  to  the  east 
and  south  of  Fresno.  Drain  ditches  4  to  G  feet  deep  have  now  replaced  the  irrigation 
ditches  from  which  a  few  years  ago  water  was  spread  over  the  surface  of  the  ground. 


WATER    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVEK.  317 

It  thus  happens  that  very  large  areas  of  the  lands  classed  as  irrigated  and  benefited 
by  canal  water  tio  longer  have  the  water  spread  over  their  surface.  The  drainage 
works  thus  far  introduced  are  all  merely  local,  and  no  systematic  attempt  to  prevent 
an  undesirable  encroachment  of  the  ground  water  upon  the  surface  soils  nor  to 
intercept  the  frequent  freshet  floods  of  the  small  foothill  streams  has  yet  been 
made. 

THE   PRESENT    SITUATION. 

To  terminate  vexatious  litigation  between  the  users  of  water  from  Kings  River 
a  number  of  agreements  have  been  entered  into  amounting  to  a  mutual  recognition 
of  rights  of  water.  Rights  thus  conceded  are  not  defined  by  a  judicial  tribunal,  and 
such  agreements  are  probably  without  force  and  effect  as  against  any  other  claimants. 
There  is  in  such  agreements  more  or  less  danger  that  amounts  of  water  may  be 
mutually  conceded  far  in  excess  of  the  amounts  actually  appropriated  and  put  to 
beneficial  use,  the  foundation  being  thereby  laid  for  obstructing  the  putting  of  the 
river's  surplus  to  any  new  uses.  To  give  such  agreements  greater  force,  friendly 
lawsuits  are  sometimes  instituted,  and.  on  the  basis  of  the  testimony  furnished,  decrees 
are  rendered  confirming  them.  This  would  be  a  step  in  the  right  direction  if  the 
machinery  of  the  court  were  such  that  the  facts  could  be  verified,  and  if,  at  the  same 
time,  the  rights  of  other  appropriators  were  under  consideration  and  could  also  be 
thoroughly  investigated.  It  does  not  appear  that  at  this  writing  the  right  to  the  use 
of  water  from  the  river  has  been  clearly  established,  in  so  far  as  quantity  to  be 
diverted  is  concerned,  for  a  single  Kings  River  canal.  The  agriculturist,  therefore, 
whose  whole  interest  depends  upon  a  continued  supply  of  irrigation  water  and  upon 
the  rights  of  the  canal  from  which  he  is  supplied,  can  not  be  secure  in  his  position 
until  this  question  of  right  to  use  is  settled.  The  delay  in  the  settlement  of  all  these 
matters  is  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  the  appropriators,  who  were  in  most  cases 
landowners  or  corporations  formed  by  landowners,  preferred  to  submit  to  a  certain 
measure  of  injustice  rather  than  to  enter  upon  expensive  litigation.  Now  that 
demand  at  times  calls  for  more  water  than  the  streams  can  supply,  the  evil  results  of 
permitting  every  water  user  to  regulate  his  own  taking  are  becoming  apparent. 
The  irrigator  is  forced  into  court  to  protect  himself,  and  attempts  are  made  to  adjudi- 
cate rights.  The  results  are  not  satisfactory;  nothing  short  of  an  injunction  issued 
by  some  judicial  tribunal  will  shut  down  the  headgate  of  an  upstream  canal  which, 
by  reason  of  its  position,  has  the  first  chance  at  the  water  of  the  stream,  but  whose 
rights  are  perhaps  subject  to  the  prior  rights  of  many  of  the  downstream  canals  or 
ditches.  But  the  shutting  down  of  the  gate  is  generally  unnecessary.  Regulation 
is  required,  and  the  regulation  should  be  in  the  hands  of  some  State  authority. 

The  recourse  which  has  been  had  to  the  courts  and  which  has  led  to  the  issuance 
of  injunctions  against  canals  and  ditches,  now  serves  to  emphasize  the  need  of  such 
regulations.  This  is  recognized,  as  already  stated,  by  the  canal  owners,  who,  by 
forming  combinations  of  canal  interests,  strengthen  the  cause  of  one  irrigated  section 
against  adverse  interests.  They  endeavor  in  such  cases  to  secure  by  agreement  with 
possible  adverse  claimants  a  recognition  of  their  rights,  thereby  securing  in  a  measure 
the  protection  which  the  laws  of  the  State  have  failed  to  give. 

No  appropriate!-,  however  small  his  claim  may  be  to  the  use  of  water,  should  be 


318  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

allowed  to  perfect  his  claim,  or  to  put  the  water  to  the  intended  use,  without  the 
sanction  and  protection  of  the  State.  Such  protection  can  not  he  assured  until  the 
State  takes  cognizance  of  the  amount  of  water  at  its  disposal  and  limits  the  amount 
assigned  for  use  to  the  available  supply.  Herein,  above  all,  lies  the  necessity  for 
continued  investigation. 

The  industries  as  now  established  need  protection.  The  users  of  water  should 
have  their  rights  defined.  It  must  be  determined  under  what  conditions  of  flow  in 
the  river  a  ditch  shall  receive  water,  and  how  much,  and  in  that  right  to  receive  its 
water  the  ditch  must  be  protected  be\Tond  peradventure. 

It  is  not  wise  to  longer  permit  each  canal  owner  to  take  water  if  he  can  get  it, 
with  shotgun  protection  if  necessary,  nor,  when  the  canal  company  and  its  officers 
are  all  enjoined  from  opening  gates,  to  let  the  irrigator  turn  in  water  despite  court 
injunctions.  Either  the  canal  has  a  right  to  use  water  and  must  be  protected  therein, 
or  it  has  no  right,  there  being  a  prior  or  a  higher  established  use  for  the  water  some- 
where else,  and  then  the  law  should  be  enforced. 

The  cause  of  the  uncertainty  of  the  right  to  use  water,  either  under  the  riparian 
doctrine  or  by  appropriation,  is  due  to  the  indefiniteness  of  the  law  and  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  machinery  for  its  application.  Where  appropriations  are  in  question, 
the  uncertainty  of  the  rights  acquired  has  been  already  sufficiently  emphasized. 
Under  the  common  law,  as  interpreted  by  our  courts,  each  case  must  be  settled  on  its 
own  merits;  there  is  no  specific  rule  that  can  be  applied.  The  only  remedy,  under 
the  circumstances,  appears  to  be  for  the  State  to  step  in  at  once  and  provide  machinery 
for  the  speedy  determination  of  established  rights  of  whatsoever  character,  and  to 
give  definiteness  to  the  rights  of  all  claimants.  It  will  thereby  be  placed  in  position 
to  determine  what  are  surplus  waters,  and  the  way  will  be  open  for  such  further 
irrigation  development  as  circumstances  warrant. 

Canal  management  is  generally  most  businesslike  when  the  canal  is  owned  by  per- 
sons, companies,  or  corporations  who  are  not  landowners,  but  are  merely  the  agents 
for  distributing  the  water  to  consumers;  but,  notwithstanding  this  fact  and  despite 
the  probability  of  less  intelligent  management,  there  seems  to  be  no  question  that 
canal  ownership  by  the  same  persons  who  own  the  land  is  far  to  be  preferred.  The 
ideal  arrangement  would  be  the  ownership  in  the  irrigating  canal  or  ditch  in  exact 
proportion  to  acreage  that  is  to  be  irrigated.  Land  and  the  use  of  the  water  necessary 
to  make  the  land  productive  should  not  be  separated  in  ownership.  It  is  only  thus 
that  fullest  benefit  from  the  use  of  water  can  be  secured;  it  must  not  alone  be  used 
economically  by  the  irrigator  and  handled  without  unnecessary  waste  in  transit  from 
stream  to  the  lands  to  be  benefited,  but  the  irrigator  must  know  that  he  is  secured  in 
his  own  rights  so  long  as  he  complies  with  his  part  of  the  contract. 

One  matter  just  touched  upon  which  interests  all  irrigators  and  which  particularly 
interests  the  State  at  large  is  the  economical  use  of  water.  Whether  water  is  allowed 
to  run  to  waste,  perhaps  on  demand  of  a  riparian  owner,  or  is  used  in  a  wasteful 
manner,  either  by  a  riparian  owner,  by  a  canal  company  in  effecting  distribution,  or 
by  the  individual  irrigator,  or  whether  it  does  duty  on  crops  of  low  economic  value 
when  it  might  be  put  to  higher  use,  injury  to  the  community  at  large  is  the  result. 

So  soon  as  the  canal  capacities  become  so  large  as  to  leave  no  surplus  flow  in  the 
stream  for  further  canal  development,  while  the  lands  commanded  are  not  yet 


WATEK    APPROPRIATION    FROM    KINGS    RIVER.  319 

all  supplied,  the  taking  of  measures  to  restrict  waste  wherever  possible,  and  to  make 
the  water  ordinarily  wasted  do  full  duty,  should  be  considered  imperative.  Education 
in  this  direction  should  not  be  neglected.  The  good  work  already  done  by  various 
United  States  and  State  departments  in  this  direction  is  to  be  highly  commended  and 
the  example  should  be  followed  in  this  State,  which  is  one  of  the  foremost  in  the 
matter  of  extent  of  irrigation,  but  one  of  the  last  to  give  its  irrigators  much-needed 
aid  and  protection. 

The  study  of  methods  of  water  measurements,  delivery  of  water  to  irrigatora, 
and  the  application  of  water  to  the  soil,  becomes  of  great  importance.  Each  State 
must  be  prepared  to  meet  these  questions,  and  wherever  irrigation  is  of  considerable 
extent  this  can  be  done  only  by  a  department  with  broad  duties  and  permanently 
established.  Such  investigation  can  not  be  terminated  in  a  year  or  two,  and  should 
continue  indefinitely,  as  there  will  be  much  to  learn,  even  after  the  conditions  in 
irrigated  sections  have  become  fairly  permanent.  The  State  should  not  be  slow  in 
aiding  the  agriculturist,  even  if  the  aid  stops  with  good  advice;  neither  should  it  be 
lax  in  protecting  his  rights  to  the  moisture  which  the  soil  needs  any  more  than  in 
protecting  him  in  the  possession  of  the  realty  itself. 

But  little  control  has  been  exercised  in  the  past  by  the  State  of  California  over  the 
conditions  imposed  by  canal  owners  upon  the  takers  of  water.  The  law  provides 
that  lands  once  served  with  water  from  any  canal  from  which  water  is  sold  have 
equal  rights  with  all  other  lands  in  their  class  and  can  not  be  deprived  of  their  right 
to  receive  water  at  the  pleasure  of  the  canal  owner.  Otherwise  canal  owners  make 
regulations  to  suit  themselves.  This  is  fairly  well  illustrated  in  the  remarks  made 
upon  canal  management  and  water  distribution  in  the  foregoing  pages,  for  each  of 
the  more  important  irrigation  works  described. 

The  rates  charged  by  any  canal  owner  for  water  are  subject  to  regulation  by  the 
board  of  supervisors  of  the  county  in  which  the  water  is  for  sale.  There  has  been 
but  little  demand  for  such  regulation  in  Fresno,  Tulare,  and  Kings  counties,  because 
it  seems  questionable  whether  the  water-right  agreement  is  subject  to  such  regula- 
tion, and  because  where  rates  are  charged  the  irrigators  are,  for  the  most  part,  stock- 
holders in  the  canal  company,  and  would  have  to  contribute  to  canal  expenses  as 
stockholders  if  the  amount  collected  from  ratepayers  should  prove  insufficient  to 
meet  expenses.  There  is,  therefore,  but  little  occasion  for  complaint.  It  seems 
.questionable  whether  the  power  to  fix  water  rates,  or,  rather,  whether  the  power  to 
appraise  canal  valuation  as  a  basis  for  fixing  water  rates,  should  be  intrusted  to  such 
bodies  as  supervisors.  The  rates  are  to  be  fixed  so  as  to  yield  a  fair  return  on  the 
value  of  the  works  in  actual  use.  This  value  should  be  appraised  by  some  State 
rather  than  by  a  local  department,  and  the  value  determined  should  serve  as  a  basis 
for  the  rates  in  all  of  the  several  counties  in  which  water  is  to  be  sold  by  any  canal. 
The  canal  appraisement  presents  particular  difficulties  when  values  of  franchises  are 
involved.  These  have  value  according  to  their  earning  power,  yet  it  rests  at  present 
in  the  power  of  the  rate-fixing  body  to  destroy  such  value  entirely  by  fixing  the 
entire  valuation  so  low  that  the  earnings  are  scant  interest  on  only  a  nominal  fran- 
chise value.  Difficulty  often  arises,  too,  when  canals  are  located  in  two  or  more 
counties.  The  officials  of  one  are  not  bound  by  the  acts  of  another,  and  there  may 
be  as  many  maximum  rate  scales  established  for  a  canal  as  there  are  interested 


320  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

counties.  The  fixing  of  water  rates  has  always  been  a  fruitful  source  for  charges  of 
official  corruption  and  has  led  to  much  litigation.  Whenever  the  landowners  them- 
selves own  the  canals,  and  the  charge  or  assessment  is  graded  from  year  to  year  to 
barely  meet  the  expense  of  canal  maintenance  and  management,  there  appears  to  be 
no  further  need  for  the  regulation  of  the  water  rates. 

Comparatively  few  canal  companies  have  been  organized  in  central  portions  of 
the  State  for  the  sale  of  water  to  irrigators.  When  the  canal  companies  are  not 
controlled  by  the  landowners  who  are  served  with  their  water,  agreements  or  water 
contracts  are  usually  entered  into  under  which  the  landowner  obligates  himself  to 
pay  a  stipulated  sum  annually  to  the  canal  company.  He  is  charged  an  annual  rate 
for  canal  management  and  maintenance.  It  is  generally  assumed  that  such  water 
contracts  and  annual  rates  paid  are  not  subject  to  regulation  as  in  ordinary  cases  of 
sales  of  water. 

These  contracts  appear  defective,  particular!}'  in  this,  that  no  intent  is  disclosed 
of  ever  transferring  the  canal  ownership  to  the  landowner  who  virtually  has  paid  for 
the  canal  construction.  The  $10  per  acre,  or  whatever  price  ma,y  have  been  fixed 
by  the  canal  corporation,  is  a  payment  for  the  privilege  of  receiving  water.  It  is 
practically  a  bonus  paid  to  the  canal  company.  Such  payments  are  often  agreed 
upon  by  landowners  before  canals  are  built  to  encourage  and  aid  in  the  canal  con- 
struction. It  is  then  a  recognition  of  the  unearned  increment,  a  voluntary  contri- 
bution made  to  an  enterprising  ditch  or  canal  builder,  in  consideration  of  the  value 
added  to  the  land  when  it  is  brought  under  ditch.  When  such  bonus  is  paid  to  the 
owner  of  a  canal  already  constructed,  the  contract  made  takes  the  form  of  a  water- 
right  agreement.  As  the  bonus  so  paid  is  usually  fixed  high  enough  to  reimburse 
the  ditch  owner  for  his  original  outlay  and  for  the  risk  he  has  assumed,  it  would 
seem  a  desirable  arrangement  to  have  the  canal  ownership  pass  to  the  water-right 
owners  when  a  stipulated  number  of  water  rights  have  been  sold.  No  canal  enter- 
prise has  j'et  been  inaugurated  on  these  lines  in  this  section.  All  canal  companies 
selling  water  rights  retain  their  ownership  intact  when  water  is  sold  to  full  canal 
capacity. 

If  it  be  granted  that  rights  have  been  vested,  whether  under  the  common  law  or 
otherwise,  then  the  taking  of  water  to  the  detriment  and  actual  damage  of  lands  in 
which  such  rights  are  vested,  should  be  under  the  right  of  eminent  domain,  and  after 
due  process  of  law  full  compensation  for  such  taking  should  be  made.  Moreover, 
the  taking  of  waters  for  irrigation  which  are  not  surplus  waters  should  then  be 
permitted  only  when  irrigation  can  be  shown  to  be  a  higher  use.  On  the  other  hand, 
when  there  is  no  actual  damage  no  one,  even  with  prior  vested  rights,  should  have 
the  right  to  interfere  with  new  enterprises.  There  should  then  be  some  means  of 
determining  what  waters  are  available  for  appropriation  in  excess  of  those  necessaiy 
to.  be  left  in  the  streams  to  satisfy  the  needs  of  riparian  owners  and  of  prior 
appropriators. 

This  has  not  been  the  case  in  the  past,  and  it  is  rather  surprising  that  there  has 
not  been  greater  interference  by  riparian  owners  with  irrigation  works  than  has 
actually  taken  place-.  This  is  due  mainly  to  the  fact  that  riparian  owners  have  not 
had  immediate  important  use  for  the  water  themselves,  and  have  been  reluctant  to 
plunge  into  expensive  and  protracted  litigation;  they  have,  too,  in  many  cases 
asserted  their  riparian  rights  only  to  better  themselves  as  appropriators. 


WATER    APl'KOIMUATION    FROM    KINGS    KIVKK.  321 

How  completely  ownership  in  the  waters  of  a  stream  is  sometimes  assumed  is 
illustrated  by  the  agreement  covering  it  sale  of  water  and  of  land  which  was  made  by 
the  owners  of  the  River  Ranch  (Lacuna  de  Tache  Rancho)  with  the  now  defunct  Sunset 
Irrigation  District  in  1S!)2.  The  control  of  the  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company 
has  passed  into  the  hands  of  English  capital.  The  controlling  interest  is  reported  to 
be  held,  as  already  stated,  by  the  same  persons  who  control  the  Kings  River  and 
Fresno  Canal,  and  who  are  the  principal  Owners  of  the  great  riparian  tract — the  Laguna 
de  Tache  Rancho.  This  is  the  riparian  land  whose  former  owners  secured  decrees  of 
court  forever  restraining  the  same  Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal  from  diverting  any 
water  at  all,  and  which  also  secured  similar  decrees  against  the  Fowler  Switch  Canal 
and  the  Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal,  and  a  decision  almost  as  sweeping  against 
the  76  Canal.  According  to  the  agreement  referred  to,  George  Clarke  Cheape  and 
his  associates,  owners  of  the  Lagunda  de  Tache  Rancho,  assumed  the  right  to  sell 
of  the  waters  of  Kings  River  to  the  extent  of  3,500  cubic  feet  per  second,  but  in 
making  this  sale  compelled  a  recognition  of  the  prior  right  of  the  Fresno  Canal  to 
3,000  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  of  the  prior  right  of  the  Grant  Canal,  irrigating 
the  Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho,  to  the  extent  of  500  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  price 
agreed  upon  and  paid  for  this  water  and  for  about  2,200  acres  of  land  was  $250,000 
in  irrigation  district  bonds. 

This  transaction  is  a  forceful  indication  of  the  extent  of  the  rights  sometimes 
assumed  to  be  conferred  by  the  riparian  doctrine,  and  seems  to  be  a  literal  interpre- 
tation of  the  right  to  have  the  river  water — in  flood  as  well  as  at  its  lowest  stage — 
flow  undiminished  in  quantity.  Such  an  interpretation  would,  it  is  quite  evident, 
make  it  possible  for  the  most  favorably  located  riparian  owner,  the  one  owning  lands 
farthest  downstream,  to  levy  upon  every  appropriates  above,  whether  he  is  damaged 
in  fact  or  not. 

NEED  OF  A  DEPARTMENT  FOB  WATER  CONTROL  AND  INVESTIGATION. 

The  existing  conditions  of  Kings  River,  which  are  typical  of  those  which  prevail 
on  Kern,  Tule,  Keweah,  San  Joaquin,  Merced  rivers,  and  other  streams  of  the  San 
Joaquin  Valley  point  to  the  need  of  a  State  department  to  determine  established 
rights  to  the  use  of  water,  to  measure  the  quantities  of  water  that  are  available,  to 
distribute  the  water  to  those  who  have  rights,  and  to  study  the  economic  use  of 
water  and  the  possibilities  of  water  storage,  and  of  water  conservation. 

When  the  question  arises  as  to  how  such  a  department  shall  be  organized,  it  will 
be  well  to  look  to  other  States  where  experience  has  already  been  had. 

It  is  not  the  intention  of  this  paper  to  elaborate  a  scheme  for  this  purpose.  There 
is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  succeed  here  as  well  as  in  Wyoming.  The  department 
should  have  certain  judicial  functions.  Its  acts  should  be  subject  to  review  and 
confirmation  by  the  courts.  Its  duties  need  not  be  restricted  to  the  irrigation  inquiry 
alone,  but  may  be  extended  to  drainage  and  to  such  other  matters  as  are  ordinarily 
assigned  to  departments  of  public  works.  In  this  department  all  rights  to  the  use  of 
any  water  heretofore  granted,  or  to  be  granted,  by  the  State  should  be  recorded,  and 
in  it  a  careful  and  complete  record  of  the  physical  facts  relating  to  each  water 
appropriation  should  be  preserved. 

In  determining  the  measure  of  the  right  to  use  water,  not  only  ditch  capacity  and 

23856— No.  100—01 21 


322  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

amount  diverted  .should  he  taken  into  consideration,  but  also  the  acreage  irrigated. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  assume  that  any  psirticular  acre  of  land  will  require  just  as  much 
water  as  any  other  acre,  as  this  will  depend  largely  upon  the  physical  character  of  the 
land  served,  upon  the  natureof  the  crops  cultivated  and  for  which  the  land  is  suitable. 
.  and  upon  the  amount  of  rainfall.  But  when  these  facts  and  all  others  affecting  the 
needs  of  any  tract  of  land,  or  of  a  district,  are  taken  into  consideration,  some  conclusion 
can  be  reached  as  to  the  extent  of  past  or  prospective  beneficial  use. 

Applications  for  a  grant  or  franchise  for  the  use  of  water  for  any  particular 
purpose  should  rather  specify  this  purpose  with  precision,  than  the  amount  of  water 
desired.  Competent  State  authority  should  issue  the  water  right,  with  a  clear 
definition  of  the  right  thereby  conferred. 

The  establishment  of 'such  a  department  should  not  be  delayed.  The  problems 
to  be  solved  are  becoming  more  complex  from  year  to  year,  and  can  be  settled  with 
less  friction  now  than  at  any  future  time.  Their  final  settlement  will  be  a  potent 
factor  in  establishing  the  prosperity  of  the  districts  now  irrigated  and  of  others  for 
which  water  can  be  made  available,  on  a  sound  and  permanent  basis. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

The  conclusions  reached  as  a  result  of  this  inquiry  may  be  briefly  stated  as 
follows: 

(1)  No  water  rights  are  as  yet  clearly  defined,  either  by  the  records  or  by  deci- 
sions of  the  courts. 

(2)  The  extent  and  the  priority  of  established  rights  to  water  and  to  the  use  of 
water  should  be  ascertained  and  clearly  defined,  and  the  necessary  water  should  be 
allotted  to  riparian  owners  and  to  appropriators  in  accordance  with  their  needs  and 
their  rights. 

(3)  The  available  supply  from  each  stream  should  be  determined  and  apportioned 
to  those  who  have  the  right  to  use  it — all  surplus  to  be  at  the  disposal  of  the  State. 

(4)  The  right  of  every  bank  landowner  to  use  water  should  be  as  clearly  defined 
as  the  right  of  the  appropriate!-,  and  the  measure  of  his  right  should  not  be  the 
possible  future  use. 

(5)  Due  consideration  should  be  given  to  priority  of  use  as  between  appropri- 
ators, as  well  as  between  riparian  owners. 

(6)  The  distribution  of  water  to  the  canals  and  ditches  should  be  under  State 
control. 

(7)  The  study  of  the  available  supply  and  of  the  use  of  water  for  irrigation  should 
be  carried  on  by  the  State  and  by  the  Federal  Government.     Duty  of  water  and 
methods  of  irrigation,  canal  structures,  canal  management,  and  water  .distribution 
should  receive  special  consideration,  and  the  work  done  by  the  State  should  supple- 
ment similar  work  being  done  by  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture  and  by  the 
U.  S.  Geological  Survey,  and  the  results  should  be  brought  within  convenient  reach 
of  all  interested  parties. 

(8)  The  right  of  eminent  domain  should  be  given  to  every  person,  company,  or 
corporation  to  whom  the  right  to  use  water  has  been  duly  allotted  by  competent 
authority,  in  order  that  condemnation  proceedings  may  be  had  whenever  necessary  to 
take  private  property  for  a  higher  use. 


EVAPORATION    EXPERIMENTS    ON    KINGS    RIVER.  323 

(!>)  A  complete  record  of  water  rights  for  the  entire  State  should  be  kept' in  a 
State  office,  and  these  records  should  show  not  only,  as  at  present,  the  original  intent 
of  the  claimant,  but  also  the  allotment  of  water  by  the  proper  authority,  the  date  of 
ditch  or  canal  construction,  the  dimensions  of  the  finished  structure,  its  ordinary 
flow, and  its  capacity;  also  subsequent  enlargements  and  all  other  facts  that  are 
essential  in  comparing  its  claim  to  water  with  those  of  other  canals  or  ditches  taking 
water  from  the  same  stream.  History  and  records  of  this  kind  can. not  be  made 
by  the  water  appropriate*,  but  should  in  large  part  be  the  result  of  original  inquiry 
and  measurements  by  State  officials. 

(10)  Litigation  is  not  leading  to  a  satisfactory  solution  of  the  water-right  prob- 
lems.    The  fault  is  not  so  much  with  the  courts  as  it  is  with  the  uncertainty  of  what 
is  to  be  considered  law.     There  is  no  intelligible  rule  of  decisions.     Each  case  is 
peculiar  to  itself.     No  irrigator  can  ascertain  his  rights  without  an  analysis  of  com- 
mon law  as  applied  in  countries  and  under  conditions  that  are  hardly  comparable 
with  those  here  prevailing. 

(11)  Some  method  should  be  devised  for  establishing  rules  of  decision  in  water- 
right  matters  that  will  rest  on  a  positive  basis  and  that  will  not  be  susceptible  of 
varied  interpretation. 

(12)  The  right  to  water  or  its  use  should  pass  to  the  land  served  and  should 
remain  attached  thereto.     Canal  owners  should  be  considered  common  carriers. 

(18)  The  flow  of  the  river  should  be  increased  at  the  low-water  stage  so  far  as 
practicable  by  water  storage  in  mountain  reservoirs. 

(14)  All  rights  conferred  under  franchises,  or  as  special  privileges,  should,  at 
the  termination  thereof,  pass  to  the  people  benefited,  and  such  franchise  or  privilege 
should  not  be  renewable  without  their  consent. 


APPENDIX. 
EVAPORATION  EXPERIMENTS  ON  KINGS  RIVER. 

The  following  tables  contain  the  results  of  evaporation  experiments  made  by 
the  State  engineer's  department  of  California '  in  the  years  1881  to  1885  at  Kingsburg, 
on  Kings  River. 

The  pans  used  in  making  these  observations  were  3  feet  square  and  15  inches 
deep.  The  water  surface  was  maintained  about  5  inches  below  the  rim  of  the  pan, 
the  required  position  being  indicated  by  a  metal  galvanized  iron  pin  rising  in  the 
center  of  the  pan  to  the  desired  height.  The  point  of  this  pin  was  kepf  barely 
submerged. 

The  amount  of  water  required  from  time  to  time  to  restore  its  surface  in  the 
pans  to  a  normal  elevation  was  measured  in  standard  cups  prepared  for  the  purpose 
and  graduated  to  represent  depth  of  water  in  the  pan  for  which  used. 

One  pan  was  floated  in  the  river,  another  was  kept  on  the  bank.  The  pan  on 
the  bank,  referred  to  as  the  pan  in  the  air  in  the  tables,  was,  after  the  first  three 


1  William  Hammond  Hall,  State  engineer.     The  department  was  abolished  in  1891. 


324 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


months,  set  into  the  ground  a  few  inches  and  earth  was  banked  up  around  its  sides 
to  the  same  elevation  as  the  water  in  it.  It  had  full  surface  exposed  to  sun  and  wind. 
During  November  and  December,  1881,  and  January,  1882,  this  pan  was  on  the 
railroad  bridge,  exposed  on  all  sides  to  sun  and  air. 

The  observers  at  Kingsburg  were  instructed,  among  other  things — 

To  fill  the  pan  to  the  normal  plane  once  every  day  during  summer  months,  less  frequently  at 
other  seasons  pi  the  year. 

To  take  observations  at  the  commencement  of  every  fall  of  rain,  and  to  restore  the  water  surface 
to  the  normal  plane  at  the  end  of  every  fall  of  rain. 

To  keep  a  daily  record  of  the  temperature  of  the  air,  of  the  water  in  the  pang,  and  of  the  water 
in  the  river. 

To  keep  a  rainfall  record. 

The  pan  floated  in  Kings  River  was  protected  from  the  splash  of  waves  by  a 
wooden  frame,  into  which  the  pan  was  fitted  so  as  to  float  horizontally,  without  being 
protected  from  the  sun  or  wind. 

Evaporation  at  Kingsburg,  Col.,  November  1,  1881,  to  October  31,  1885. l 


Period. 

Time. 

Temper- 
ature 
of  air. 

Pan  in  river. 

Pan  in  air. 

Temper- 
ature of 
river. 

Temper- 
ature of 
water 
in  pan. 

Evapora- 
tion. 

Temper- 
ature of 
water 
in  pan. 

Evapo- 
rated 
depth. 

November,  1881      ... 

4.30p.m  

°F. 

66 
55 
54 
56 
64 
73 
84 
88 
98 
% 
81 
68 

Of, 

56 
52 
52 
55 
60 
63 
63 
67 
80 
84 
73 
63 

°F. 
55 
62 
50 
54 
59 
62 
63 
68 
81 
85 
73 
63 

Feet. 
0.220 
.050 
.090 
.115 
.180 
.260 
.305 
.475 
.660 
.665 
.475 
.135 

°F. 
60 
55 
53 
56 
66 
72 
77 
83 
91 
85 
75 
60 

Feet. 
0.335 
.120 
.200 
.105 
.265 
.435 
.835 
.940 
1.075 
.875 
.575 
.195 

December,  1881  

do  

January  1882 

do 

February,  1882  
March  1882  

6  p.  m  

5.  15  p.  m 

April,  1882  

do  

May,  1882  
June,  1882  
July,  1882    

5.45  p.m  
6.30  p.m  
do  

August,  1882  

6  p.  m  

September  1882 

do 

October,  1882  
Total  

10  a.  m  

3.630 

ft.  955 

November  1882 

10  a.  m 

53 
51 
43 
54 
69 
67 
76 
92 
96 
93 
88 
69 

62 
50 
44 
50 
63 
61 
61 
68 
82 
82 
78 
62 

52 
50 
43 
49 
62 
62 
63 
71 
84 
83 
79 
62 

49 

46 
41 
52 
60 
61 
67 
77 
78 
75 
73 
57 

.115 
.085 
.060 
.100 
.305 
.270 
.160 
.500 
.760 
.920 
.730 
.400 

.100 
.090 
.040 
.070 
.310 
.260 
.310 
.850 
.970 
.970 
.705 
.290 

December,  1882 

do.. 

January,  1883  

do  

February  1883 

do 

March  1883 

do 

April,  1883    

do. 

May,1883  

do  

June,  1883 

do 

July,1883  ..  . 

..      do 

August,  1883  

do 

September,  1883  

do  

October,  1883  

do  

Total  

4  405 

4.965 

November,  1883 

59 
49 
47 

56 

48 
48 

54 
47 
48 

52 
44 
44 

.170 
.080 
.105 

.140 
.065 
.075 

December,  1883  

do 

January,  1884  .  .  . 

9  a.  m  .  . 

'See  Physical  Data  and  Statistics,  William  Hammond  Hall,  State  engineer,  1886. 


EVAPORATION    EXPERIMENTS    ON    KINGS    RIVER. 

K'ingslturg,  Col.,  November  1,  1881,  to  October  31,  1885— Continued. 


325 


Period. 

Time. 

Temper- 
ature 
of  air. 

Pan  in  river. 

Pan  in  air. 

Temper- 
ature of 
river. 

Temper- 
ature of 
water 
in  pan. 

Evapora- 
tion. 

Temper- 
ature of 
water 
in  pan. 

Evapo- 
rated 
depth. 

February,  1884  

°F. 
52 
61 
67 
76 
77 
83 
78 
75 
68 

°F. 
62 
56 
60 
69 
57 
61 
64 
63 
62 

°F. 
52 
57 
61 
61 
60 
63 
66 
63 
63 

Feet. 
0.060 
.090 
.160 
.320 
.295 
.380 
.370 
.320 
.360 

°F. 
49 
57 
61 
69 
61 
73 
69 
64 
60 

Feet. 
0.060 
.105 
.180 
.400 
.505 
.670 
.670 
.520 
.310 

March,  1884  

do 

April,  1884  

do 

M«y,1884  

do 

June,  1884  

do 

Julv,1884  

do 

August,  1884  

do 

September,  1884  

do. 

October,  1884  

do 

Total  

2.690 

3.700 

November,  1884  

9  a.  m  

58 
50 
48 
54 

65 
68 
75 
77 
84 
86 
79 
71 

58 
48 
60 
53 
60 
62 
63 
65 
72 
72 
74 
67 

57 
47 
49 
63 
60 
63 
65 
68 
74 
72 
74 
66 

66 
48 
47 
51 
59 
63 
68 
71 
.74 
72 
71 
63 

.200 
.180 
.010 
.140 
.240 
.160 
.340 
.660 
.710 
.930 
.640 
.470 

.120 
.140 
.010 
.130 
.220 
.270 
.660 
.810 
.900 
.930 
.660 
.360 

December,  1884  

.do 

January,  1885  

do 

February,  1885  

..  .do..  .. 

March,  1885  

do 

April,  1885  

..    do... 

May,1885  

do 

June,  1885  

.  ...do.. 

July,1885  

_do 

August,  1885  

...do..  . 

September,  1885 

do 

October,  1885  

do  

Total  

4.680 

5.210 

Average  evaporation  for  four  years,  November  1,  1881,  to  October  31,  1886. 


Month. 

Pan  in  river. 

Pan  in  air. 

Evapora- 
tion. 

Evapora- 
tion per 
24  hours. 

Evapora- 
tion per 
square 
mile. 

Evapora- 
tion. 

Evapora- 
tion per 
24  hours. 

Evapora- 
tion per 
square 
mile. 

November  

Feet. 
0.176 
.099 
.066 
.101 
.204 
.213 
.281 
.483 
.628 
.721 
.541 
.339 

Feet. 
0.0059 
.0032 
.0021 
.0036 
.0066 
.0071 
.0091 
.0161 
.0203 
.0233 
.0180 
.0109 

Cu./t. 
per  sec. 

1.89 
1.03 
.69 
1.16 
2.12 
2.29 
2.93 
5.20 
6.54 
7.51 
5.82 
3.53 

Feet. 
0.174 

.104 
.081 
.091 
.225 
.286 
.551 
.776 
.904 
.861 
.615 
.289 

Feet. 
0.0058 
.0034 
.0026 
.0033 
.0073 
.0095 
.0178 
.0259 
.0292 
.0278 
.0205 
.0093 

Cv,.Jt. 
per.  tec. 

1.87 
1.08 
.84 
1.06 
2.34 
3.08 
5.74 
8.35 
9.41 
8.96 
6.62 
3.01 

January  

March 

April...                                                                                         

May. 

July  

October  ."?..... 

Total                                                                 

3.851 

.0106 

3.40 

4.958 

.0136 

4.38 

A  STUDY  OF  WATER  RIGHTS  ON  THE  LOS  ANGELES  RIVER,  CALIFORNIA. 

By  EDWARD  M.  BOGGS,  C.  E. 
Consulting  Engineer. 

DISCOVERY  AND  COLONIZATION. 

Nearly  four  centuries  ago,  when  the  adventurous  explorers  of  the  unknown 
Pacific  Ocean,  following  the  shore  of  California,  touched  at  various  points,  they  found 
the  land  inhabited  by  savages.  More  than  two  hundred  years  later,  when  the  Spanish 
missionaries,  advancing  along  the  coast,  established  the  outpost  of  European 
civilization  in  California,  they  found  the  same  race  of  people  living  in  the  same 
barbarous  condition.  Unlike  the  native  races  which  dwelt  in  parts  of  New  Mexico 
and  Arizona,  the  Indian  tribes  of  this  region  possessed  no  knowledge  of  the  art 
of  irrigation.  Without  irrigation  agriculture  was  impracticable.  Consequently 
progress  toward  civilization  was  impossible,  and  the  inhabitants  remained  in  hopeless 
barbarism. 

The  usual  Spanish  method  of  colonization  was  followed  in  the  settlement  of 
California.  This  plan,  which  had  been  successful  in  Mexico  and  Lower  California, 
embraced  three  classes  of  communities — missions,  presidios,  and  pueblos. 

The  first  was  due  to  the  zealous  efforts  of  the  Spanish  missionaries  for  the 
propagation  of  the  Christain  faith  among  savage  inhabitants  of  the  region.  Beginning 
at  San  Diego,  in  1769,  a  chain  of  missions  extending  to  San  Francisco  was  founded. 
This  line  comprised  eleven  establishments,  spaced  some  15  to  25  leagues  apart,  and 
usually  situated  on  or  near  the  coast.  A  second  line  parallel  to  the  first,  but  at  a 
convenient  distance  farther  inland,  was  planned,  and  some  of  these  missions  were 
built  at  a  later  period.  The  missionaries  undertook  to  minister  to  the  temporal  needs 
as  well  as  the  spiritual  welfare  of  their  converts.  They  clothed  and  fed  them,  taught 
them  how  to  labor  intelligently  on  the  farms,  to  build  comfortable  dwellings,  and 
introduced  among  them  various  kinds  of  domestic  animals.  Under  their  direction 
was  begun  the  practice  of  irrigation,  destined  in  future  generations  to  become  the 
most  potent  factor  in  the  permanent  development  of  California. 

Each  mission  was  provided  with  a  small  guard  of  soldiers  for  protection  against 
possible  uprisings  of  the  natives.  To  serve  as  supports  or  rallying  points  in  times  of 
great  danger  from  this  source,  and  also  as  means  of  defense  against  attacks  from 
jealous  foreign  nations,  four  presidios  or  military  posts  were  interspersed  along  the 
line  of  missions.  Garrisons  were  long  maintained  at  these  posts,  and  there  were 
located  the  seats  of  government  of  the  province,  which  for  many  years  was  of  a 
military  form. 

Progress  in  the  new  province  was  necessarily  slow;  all  things  seemed  to  conspire 

327 


328  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN   CALIFORNIA. 

against  the  success  of  the  undertakings.  The  natural  difficulties  to  he  surmounted 
were  great;  the  division  of  authority  between  ecclesiastic  and  military  officers  was 
not  conducive  to  the  best  results;  communication  with  the  vice-regal  Government  in 
Mexico  was  slow  and  uncertain;  costly  errors  were  made;  disastrous  delays  were 
suffered.  Nevertheless,  the  missions  were  gradually  extended  and  each  establish- 
ment grew  in  wealth  and  influence. 

Meanwhile  both  missions  and  presidios  were  a  heavy  financial  drain  upon  the 
Government  in  Mexico.  The  mission  farms  had  been  successful  from  the  outset,  but 
they  were  hardly  able  to  keep  pace  with  the  increased  demands  rising  from  the  grow- 
ing numbers  of  neophytes  and  other  dependents  of  the  missions  themselves.  Conse- 
quently they  were  able  to  do  nothing  toward  the  support  of  the  presidios.  Supplies 
of  grain  and  other  necessaries  for  the  garrison  had  to  be  imported  at  great  cost  and 
serious  delays  from  Mexico.  The  expense  and  inconvenience  of  this  arrangement 
caused  instructions  to  be  sent  to  the  governor  to  hasten  the  founding  of  the  third 
class  of  settlements — the  pueblos,  or  towns. 

The  pueblos  were  to  have  civil  governments,  practically  independent  of  control  of 
either  clerical  or  military  authority,  although  entitled  to  the  aid  and  comfort  of  both. 
They  were  to  devote  their  energies  to  the  development  of  the  material  resources  of 
the  region,  especially  in  agriculture,  even  then  recognized  as  the  only  permanent 
foundation  for  a  civilized  government.  Thus  their  establishment  was  properly 
regarded  as  the  principal  step  toward  the  colonization  of  the  wilderness  and  the  real 
advancement  of  the  new  province.  As  early  as  1776  two  sites  notably  suitable  for 
pueblos  were  selected.  One  on  the  Santa  Clara  River  in  the  north,  now  the  modern 
city  of  San  Jose,  was  settled  before  the  close  of  that  year.  Numerous  delays  pre- 
vented the  occupation  of  the  second  chosen  site,  that  on  the  Rio  de  Porciuncula  in  the 
south,  and  it  was  not  until  September  4, 1781,  that  the  pueblo  named  Nuestra  Sefiora  La 
Reina  de  los  Angeles  (Our  Lady  the  Queen  of  the  Angels)  was  founded.  The  pueblo 
has  become  the  flourishing  city  of  Los  Angeles;  the  Rio  de  Porciuncula  is  now  known 
as  Los  Angeles  River;  but  on  this  date  began  the  history  of  water  rights  on  the 
stream  and  the  chain  of  private  title  to  lands  within  the  limits  of  the  pueblo. 

The  original  population  of  the  pueblo  of  Los  Angeles  consisted  of  12  settlers 
and  their  families,  46  persons  in  all.  They  were  gathered  in  the  older  provinces  and 
were  induced  to  come  here  under  the  especial  patronage  of  the  Government.  They 
were  to  be  supplied  at  the  beginning  with  live  stock,  seed,  and  farming  implements, 
which  advances  were  to  be  repaid  from  the  products  of  the  land.  They  were  to 
receive  stated  sums  annually  for  five  years,  to  be  paid  them  in  clothing  and  other 
necessaries.  Each  settler  was  to  be  granted  a  house  lot  and  a  tract  of  farming  land, 
and,  in  addition,  all  were  to  enjoy  as  a  community  the  use  of  Government  land  for 
pasture,  and  for  obtaining  supplies  of  wood  and  water.  They  were  also  to  be  free 
from  taxes  for  five  years. 

IRRIGATION  IN  THE  PUEBLO. 

The  subject  of  irrigation  was  given  prominent  place  in  the  governmental  order 
which  directed  the  establishment  of  the  pueblo.  The  site  was  to  be  chosen  with 
particular  reference  to  irrigation  necessities,  and  the  point  for  diverting  the  water 
of  the  river  which  would  serve  the  greatest  area  of  land  was  to  be  indicated.  Many 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  329 

references  to  irrigation  exist  in  the  earlier  ordinances  and  official  correspondence, 
some  of  which  it  is  claimed  tend  to  support  the  theory  that  it  was  the  intention  of 
the  Spanish  Government  to  grant  to  the  pueblo  the  absolute  and  exclusive  ownership 
of  all  the  water  of  Los  Angeles  River.  It  is  also  asserted  that  up  to  the  beginning 
of  American  domination  in  California  the  municipal  authorities  had  exercised  full 
control  over  the  diversion  and  distribution  of  water  from  the  river,  and,  furthermore, 
that  the  present  city,  as  the  successor  of  the  old  pueblo,  is  entitled  to  all  the  rights 
and  privileges  granted  to  or  acquired  by  the  latter.  American  supremacy  brought 
the  old  English  common  law  of  riparian  rights.  The  conflict  which  naturally  ensued 
between  claimants  under  that  doctrine  and  those  asserting  the  ancient  pueblo  right 
has  produced  much  of  the  most  extensive  water  litigatioiuof  the  county.  The  cases 
involving  the  question  will  be  referred  to  in  detail  hereinafter.  The  history  of 
colonization  of  the  region  has  been  given  at  some  length  here  as  being  explanatory 
of  the  peculiar  rights  claimed  by  succession  to  the  pueblos. 

LOS  ANGELES  HIVER. 

Compared  with  prominent  streams  of  the  humid  region,  the  Los  Angeles  River 
would  seem  of  insignificant  size,  but  by  comparison  with  those  of  the  arid  region  its 
importance  is  apparent.  Its  waters  maintain  the  existence  of  the  metropolis  of 
southern  California,  the  second  city  in  size  and  importance  on  the  Pacific  coast, 
besides  watering  a  lai-ge  area  of  rich  farming  land  in  and  around  the  city.  The 
antiquity  and  peculiar  nature  of  its  water  rights  give  it  an  especial  interest. 

Hydrographically  the  Los  Angeles  River  is  a  remarkable  stream.  It  rises  in  the 
southern  edge  of  the  San  Fernando  Valley  a  few  miles  above  the  city  of  Los  Angeles. 
Its  watershed  embraces  an  area  of  about  500  square  miles,  ranging  from  precipitous 
mountains  to  smooth  and  gently  sloping  plain.  The  unusual  topography  of  the 
basin  produces  a  stream  of  considerable  volume  and  exceptional  regularity  of  flow. 
It  is  to  these  features  that  the  original  selection  of  the  site  of  the  pueblo  and  the 
permanence  of  the  modern  city  are  due.  About  85  square  miles  additional  area  of 
watershed  contribute  something  to  the  flow  of  the  river  at  points  below  the  outlet 
of  the  San  Fernando  Valley. 

The  total  area  of  500  square  miles  is  composed  of  about  175  square  miles  of  high 
mountains  and  135  square  miles  of  lower  mountains;  the  remainder  is  plain.  The 
first  division  contains  peaks  which  rise  to  heights  of  6,000  feet  or  more.  The  area  is 
well  exposed  to  the  moisture-laden  winds  from  the  Pacific  Ocean;  its  precipitation 
is  comparatively  heavy,  its  surface  slopes  are  steep,  and  the  run  off  is  rapid.  The 
second  averages  much  lower  in  altitude  than  the  lirst  and  receives  correspondingly 
less  rainfall.  The  plain  area,  owing  to  its  partially  sheltered  exposure,  receives  less 
rainfall  than  even  its  low  altitude  would  seem,  to  entitle  it  to.  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  by  reason  of  the  light  slope  of  the  surface  of  the  plain  and  the  open  nature  of 
the  soil,  practically  none  of  the  rain  falling  on  this  area  is  lost  by  run  off. 

It  is  only  at  times  of  unusual  floods  that  a  continuous  stream  extends  from 
any  one  of  the  mountain  tributaries  to  Los  Angeles  River.  At  all  other  times 
the  mountain  torrents  discharge  their  waters  upon  the  broad,  flat  plain  of  the  valley, 
into  which  they  sink  and  are  lost  to  view.  Pursuing  their  way  south  toward  the 
ocean  these  underground  waters  are  intercepted  by  the  Cahuenga  Mountains,  an 


330  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

uplifted  range  which  projects  like  a  great  wing  dam  across  the  south  side  of  the  San 
Fernando  Valley,  almost  effecting  a  junction  with  the  Verdugo  Range  on  the  east. 
The  remaining  gap,  about  1  mile  in  width,  is  the  only  apparent  outlet  for  the 
drainage  of  the  entire  watershed  of  500  square  miles.  The  greatly  contracted  width 
of  the  valley  at  the  outlet  naturally  results  in  the  rise  of  a  considerable  part  of  the 
ground  water,  and  the  flow  thus  brought  to  the  surface  forms  Los  Angeles  River. 

The  San  Fernando  Plain  extends  some  12  miles  north  and  south  by  25  miles  east 
and  west,  covering  an  area  of  about  185  square  miles.  It  rises  gently  from  eleva- 
tions of  500  to  700  feet  along  its  southern  edge  to  heights  of  1,100  or  1,200  feet 
along  its  northern  border.  Generally  speaking,  the  soil  of  the  valley  is  of  excellent 
quality,  but  here  and  there  are  seen  the  scars  left  by  occasional  torrents  from  the 
surrounding  mountains.  Below  the  surface  soil  the  bed  of  the  valley  is  composed  of 
debris  and  detritus  washed  down  from  the  surrounding  mountains.  The  thickness 
of  this  deposit  is  undetermined,  but  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  it  is  of 
enormous  extent.  Manjr  wells  have  penetrated  to  depths  of  several  hundred  feet 
without  striking  bed  rock,  one  of  them  reaching  to  about  60  feet  below  sea  level. 
The  sands  and  gravels  filling  this  vast  basin  perform  the  office  of  a  great  storage 
reservoir,  conserving  the  otherwise  wasted  water  of  rainy  seasons  and  equalizing 
the  flow  not  only  throughout  the  year  but  from  year  to  year. 

CLAIMS  TO  WATER  ON  LOS  ANGELES  RIVER. 

In  California  all  documents  relating  to  titles  to  water  rights,  like  those  affecting 
real  estate,  are  entered  of  record  in  the  office  of  the  count}'  recorder  of  the  county  in 
which  the  property  is  situated.  An  attempt  to  ascertain  the  status  of  water  rights 
along  Los  Angeles  River  disclosed  some  interesting  but  unsatisfactory  conditions  of 
the  public  records  in  this  county.  Prior  to  August,  1888,  water  rights  were  embraced 
in  miscellaneous  records,  which  term  seems  to  have  included  almost  everything  except 
deeds.  It  is  found  that  there  are  79  volumes  of  these  miscellaneous  records,  whose 
contents  are  indexed  alphabetically  by  names  of  persons  in  5  indexes.  Detailed 
search  of  the  indexes  discloses  the  fact  that  entries  of  water  rights  were  made  in 
only  10  of  the  79  volumes.  These  10  volumes  contain  1,147  water  notices,  which 
are  intermingled  with  all  sorts  of  miscellaneous  records. 

Since  August,  1888,  separate  books  have  been  devoted  exclusively  to  records  of 
water  claims.  Of  these  there  are  to  this  date  5  volumes  and  1  index,  covering  1,420 
pages,  containing  2,727  entries. 

The  magnitude  of  the  task  of  examining  the  rights  existing  on  any  one  stream 
will  be  appreciated  when  it  is  known  that  in  keeping  water  records  in  this  State  no 
effort  has  been  made  to  segregate  them  according  to  the  different  streams  in  the 
county,  to  classify  the  claims  according  to  the  intended  use  of  the  water,  or  to 
distinguish  between  the  different  classes  of  documents  which  may  relate  to  the  one 
subject  of  water.  Anything  in  writing  offered  for  record  is  forthwith  copied  into 
the  already  voluminous  records  of  the  county  in  chronological  order  of  filing.  The 
only  classification  is  the  alphabetical  index  of  names  signed  thereto.  Notices  of 
appropriation  are  naturally  the  most  numerous,  and  these  are  simply  placed  of  record 
without  regard  to  locality  or  the  use  for  which  the  water  is  claimed.  No  question 
as  to  the  existence  of  prior  rights  to  the  same  water,  the  good  faith  of  the  claimant, 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  331 

or  the  legal  sufficiency  of  the  form  of  notice  is  raised  at  any  time  or  in  any  manner. 
Unquestionably  the  records  of  Los  Angeles  County  are  incumbered  with  enormous 
masses  of  worthless  claims  to  water,  and  this  condition  is  constantly  growing  worse. 
The  crowding  already  noticeable  in  the  recorder's  office  is  some  criterion  of  what  the 
congestion  will  be  in  future  years. 

For  the  purpose  of  this  study  of  Los  Angeles  River  the  writer  has  examined 
each  one  of  the  3,874  documents  relating  to  water  which  appear  of  record  in  this 
county.  A  great  many  of  the  claims  give  no  clue  to  their  locality;  others  describe 
it  so  indirectly  or  so  imperfectly  as  to  require  a  prohibitory  amount  of  time  to 
ascertain  from  other  sources  what  stream  is  affected  thereby.  The  number  of  claims 
which  clearly  relate  to  the  main  body  of  the  river  is  small.  This  is  owing,  probably, 
to  the  exclusive  right  claimed  by  the  city.  Large  numbers  6f  claims  have  been  made 
to  the  water  of  the  several  tributaries  or  streams  existing  higher  in  the  same  water- 
shed. These  have  boon  claimed  in  detail  many  times  over,  and  much  greater  service 
has  been  expected  from  them  than  they  are  capable  of  supplying,  at  least  under  the 
present  conditions. 

The  earliest  recorded  water  claim  in  Los  Angeles  County  bears  date  July  16, 
1864,  although  it  is  well  known  that  water  was  extensively  used  for  irrigation  more 
than  eight}1  3rears  before  that  date.  It  should  be  added,  however,  that  there  exist 
in  the  archives  of  both  county  and  city  a  number  of  manuscript  books  in  the 
Spanish  language  which  contain  miscellaneous  documents  antedating  American 
occupation.  These  books  have  not  been  examined.  They  may  contain  records  of 
water  rights,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  at  that  early  period  much  attention  was 
given  to  documentary  records  of  this  character.  The  open  and  notorious  use  >of 
water  was  doubtless  considered  to  be  all  that  was  necessary  to  perfect  and  to  preserve 
a  water  right,  and  there  are  probably  not  a  few  old  and  well-recognized  water  rights 
in  this  county  in  force  at  "the  present  time  of  -which  there  is  no  record  whatever, 
except  possibly  where  mentioned  incidentally  in  transfers  of  real  estate.  As  it  is, 
many  of  the  earliest  records  of  claims  were  evidently  afterthoughts,  as  they  refer  to 
the  long  and  continuous  use  of  the  water,  or  claim  that  the  use  began  on  a  given 
date  many  years  before. 

In  these  records  water  is  claimed  for  every  conceivable  purpose  to  which  it 
could  be  applied.  The  predominating  use  stated  in  the  notices  has  been  changed 
from  time  to  time.  In  the  early  days  of  the  records  mining  was  the  principal  use 
for  which  water  was  wanted.  At  a  later  period  agricultural  and  stock  uses  were 
those  most  commonly  specified.  During  "boom"  times  irrigation  and  municipal 
supply  were  almost  invariably  named,  while  at  one  time  in  recent  years  there  was  a 
widespread  epidemic  of  schemes  for  utilizing  water  power  to  generate  electricity  for 
transmission  to  the  surrounding  centers  of  population.  Usually  the  notices  of  each 
period  embraced  not  only  the  uses  popular  at  that  time  but  also  those  of  all 

preceding  eras. 

The  wording  of  recorded  claims  shows  how  the  estimation  placed  upon  the 
importance  of  documentary  record  has  changed  from  time  to  time.  At  the  begin- 
ning, and  for  a  number  of  years,  the  belief  seems  to  have  prevailed  that  actual  use 
was  the  sole  requisite  for  a  title  to  water.  This  idea  was  not  far  wrong,  for  the 
supreme  court  of  this  State,  in  the  case  of  Waterson  >:  Saldunbehere  (101  Cal.,  107), 


332  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

has  decided  that  where  there  has  been  an  actual  appropriation  and  use  of  water  a 
right  to  it  is  acquired  regardless  of  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  the  civil  code 
for  the  acquisition  of  water  rights.  Later,  as  the  population  increased  and  the 
inadequacy  of  the  water  supply  to  meet  all  demands  became  evident,  many  water 
users  awoke  to  the  desirability  of  placing  upon  the  official  records  of  the  county 
written  statements  of  their  existing  rights  in  order  to  protect  their  interests  in  the 
future.  Thus  it  was  that  many  of  the  earlier  claims  tiled  for  record,  being  statements 
of  established  rights,  endeavor  to  date  back  to  an  earlier  period.  In  some  instances 
reference  is  made  with  some  degree  of  precision  to  a  specified  year,  but  more 
commonly  open  and  notorious  use  of  water  for  many  years  is  asserted  in  broad  and 
vague  terms.  Still  later,  the  idea  grew  to  secure  almost  general  acceptance  that  the 
mere  act  of  posting  a  written  notice  of  claim  was  the  only  thing  necessary  to  secure  title 
to  water,  or,  at  the  least,  that  it  was  so  far  the  most  important  step  as  to  overshadow 
all  other  requirements. 

It  may  be  safely  stated  that  few  of  the  recorded  water  claims  bear  evidence  of 
having  been  prepared  by  an  attorney  at  law,  but  the  great  majority  make  a  serious 
attempt  at  legal  formality  and  phraseology.  A  favorite  phrase  is  to  the  effect  that 
the  claim  is  made  "under  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  the  United  States  and  of  the 
State  of  California  in  such  cases  made  and  provided,"  whereas  the  remainder  of  the 
document  itself  is  abundant  proof  that  the  claimant  possessed  not  the  slightest  idea 
what  those  laws  were.  Another  clause  often  found  is  the  allegation  that  the  claimant 
is  "a  natural-born  citizen  of  the  United  States  over  the  age  of  twenty -one."  A 
volume  could  be  filled  with  the  superfluous  and  wholl}-  irrelevant  statements  contained 
in  notices  which  omit  to  mention  the  most  essential  facts. 

LAWS  OF  APPROPRIATION. 

Section  1415  of  the  civil  code  of  California,  enacted  in  1873,  provides  as  follows: 

A  person  desiring  to  appropriate  water  must  post  a  notice,  in  writing,  in  a  conspicuous  place  at 
the  point  of  intended  diversion,  stating  therein: 

(1)  That  he  claims  the  water  there  flowing  to  the  extent  of  (giving  the  number)   inches, 
measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure.1 

(2)  The  purpose  for  which  he  claims  it  and  the  place  of  intended  use. 

(3)  The  means  by  which  he  intends  to  divert  it  and  the  size  of  the  flume,  ditch,  pipe,  or  aqueduct 
in  which  he  intends  to  divert  it. 

A  copy  of  the  notice  must,  within  ten  days  after  it  is  posted,  be  recorded  in  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  the  county  in  which  it  is  posted. 

The  records  show  that  as  knowledge  of  these  statutory  requirements  slowly 
spread  among  the  people  subsequent  claimants  endeavored  either  in  good  faith  and 
to  the  best  of  their  ability  to  comply  therewith,  or  by  perfunctory  compliance  with 
the  letter  of  the  law  to  evade  its  spirit.  In'  consequence  many  absurd  and  prepos- 
terous claims  have  been  perpetuated  upon  the  record  books. 

The  meaning  of  the  term  "  to  appropriate  "  has  been  generally  misunderstood 
and  continues  so  to  this  day.  To  a  great  majority  of  people  "appropriation"  and 
"claiming"  are  synonymous  terms,  and  no  language  is  more  common  in  water  notices 
than  the  statement  that  "I  hereby  appropriate  the  water,"  etc. 

1  This  unit  of  measure  is  regarded  as  equivalent  to  one-fiftieth  of  one  cubic  foot  per  second. 


WATER    KTOHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  333 

It  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  in  general  the  posting  of  a  notice  at  the 
place  of  intended  diversion  is  farcical.  Usually  the  posting  is  performed  by  attach- 
ing the  paper  to  the  rough  bark  of  a  convenient  tree  somewhere  in  the  vicinity. 
Tacks  or  nails  are  not  often  provided,  and  substitutes  are  made  of  two  or  more  twigs 
driven  into  knife  punctures  in  the  bark.  Permanence  of  this  notice  is  seldom  deemed 
desirable  and  is  less  often  secured.  The  wind  may  tear  it  from  its  insecure  fastening 
a  few  minutes  after  being  placed  in  position.  If  not  destroyed  bodily  or  blown 
away  the  first  rain  may  blur  or  the  sun  may  fade  its  writing  to  illegibility.  But 
what  matter?  By  posting  the  notice  and  recording  a  copy  thereof  within  ten  days 
the  claimant  has  complied  with  the  law  and  has  no  further  concern.  If  the  public 
or  any  individual  suffers  through  the  insufficiency  or  the  ephemeral  character  of  the 
notice,  that  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  the  claimant's  fault  but  as  the  other  man's  mis- 
fortune. In  very  many  cases  a  suitable  tree  not  being  at  band  the  notice  is  not 
displayed  to  view  in  a  conspicuous  place  at  all  but  is  folded,  laid  upon  a  bowlder  or 
on  the  ground,  and  weighted  down  by  a  stone.  It  would  require  diligent  search  to 
bring  to  light  all  the  notices  which  may  be  quietly  reposing  under  stones  in  some  of 
our  mountain  canyons. 

The  statute  fails  to  require  that  the  posted  notice  shall  describe  the  geographical 
position  of  the  place  of  intended  diversion.  However,  probably  a  majority  of  the 
claims  of  record  in  Los  Angeles  County  recognize  the  desirability  of  giving  such 
information,  and  the}7  attempt  to  furnish  it.  Unfortunately,  in  a  vast  number  of  cases, 
the  description  of  locality  is  so  vague  and  indefinite  as  to  fail  utterly  in  conveying 
any  useful  information.  Usually  the  facts  set  forth  with  most  particularity  are  those 
which  are  the  most  unnecessary,  because  perfectly'  obvious,  viz,  that  the  places  are 
situated  in  Los  Angeles  County,  Cal. ,  and  in  many  cases  no  more  definite  description 
is  given.  Numerous  statements  like  the  following  are  found:  "I  claim  the  water 
where  I  now  stand,"  or  "where  this  notice  is  posted  on  a  tree,"  or  "in  this  canyon." 
Following  are  a  few  quotations  from  recorded  claims,  and  they  constitute  the  only 
information  contained  in  the  several  notices  as  to  the  localities: 

We,  the  undersigned,  claim  this  water  from  this  monument  and  ditch  for  3  miles  down  this 
canyon. 

This  water  situated  about  12  miles  from  the  city  of  Los  Angeles. 

Notice:  The  undersigned  takes  up  this  canyon  and  claims  all  this  water  running  through  this 
and  to  run,  24  inches  more  or  less  for  agricultural  and  mining  purposes,  this  notice  being  posted  at 
both  ends  of  said  canyon. 

At  a  point  above  where  the  road  crosses  the  stream  and  where  the  channel  is  depressed  and  the 
banks  are  steep  and  precipitous,  being  about  8  feet  high,  the  right  bank  being  covered  with  rocks  and 
the  left  with  trees. 

The  water  running  in  a  north  and  south  direction  in  this  canyon. 

This  notice  is  posted  about  3  miles  down  the  canyon  from  some  three  arastras  run  by  steam 
power,  and  about  400  yards  above  an  old  stamp  mill  on  the  same  canyon  or  creek. 

At  this  point,  being  a  short  distance  above  a  large  bowlder  situated  in  the  bed  of  the  creek. 

This  notice  is  posted  on  a  tree  just  below  the  water  in  the  canyon. 

Many  others  of  similar  tenor  are  found.  Frequently  the  only  description  is  by 
reference  to  some  obscure  local  name  of  a  canyon,  not  shown  upon  any  map,  and 
known  to  a  few  residents  of  the  immediate  locality  only. 

The  statute  imposes  no  restriction  upon  the  amount  of  water  which  may  be 
claimed.  In  matters  of  this  sort  the  virtue  of  self-denial  is  one  seldom  displayed. 


334  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN   CALIFORNIA. 

On  the  contrary,  the  actuating  principle  evidently  is  to  get  as  much  as  possible. 
Pursuing  this  policy,  it  is  exceptional  to  rind  a  notice  which  does  not  claim  all  the 
water  of  the  stream,  whether  it  be  large  or  small.  Frequently  all  this  is  amplified 
to  embrace  "All  that  is  now  flowing  or  that  may  flow  at  any  future  time;"  "All  that 
is  above  or  below  the  surface;''  "All  the  water  in  this  canyon  developed  and  undevel- 
oped;" "All  the  water  flowing  or  that  can  be  made  to  flow;"  "All  the  water  flowing 
and  that  can  be  developed  and  diverted  either  by  ditch,  dam,  well,  or  tunnel."  One 
man  makes  this  brief  but  forcible  declaration:  "I  claim  all  the  water  rights  of  this 
creek."  Where  the  claimant  complies  with  the  code  provision  requiring  that  the 
number  of  inches  claimed  shall  be  stated,  it  is  customary  to  claim  a  practically 
impossible  quantity.  Large  numbers  are  almost  as  easily  written  as  small  ones,  and 
there  is  no  extra  cost  for  recording  the  notice.  Hence  no  inducement  exists  for  the 
claimant  to  exercise  moderation  in  the  statement  of  his  claim.  Many  notices  claim  a 
specified  number  of  inches,  with  the  inconsistent  qualification  "more  or  less." 

It  is  not  at  all  suprising  that  a  great  many  persons  seeking  to  give  a  legal  notice 
of  their  claims  to  water  should  stumble  at  such  an  incomprehensible  unit  of  measure 
as  the  "inch  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure."  Many  of  their  efforts  to  obey  the 
law  in  this  respect  are  ludicrous.  One  claims  "all  the  water,  amounting  to  150 
inches  by  hydraulic  pressure  of  4-feet  measurement."  Another  notice  reads,  "The 
undersigned  claim  4  feet  of  water  from  under  a  4-inch  pressure."  Another,  "to  the 
extent  of  100  square  inches,  miner's  measurement."  Still  another,  "100,000,000 
cubic  feet." 

The  provisions  of  the  code  show  clearly  the  intent  of  the  legislature,  that  before 
any  person  seeking  to  appropriate  water  can  acquire  any  right  therein  he  must  have 
formed  a  definite  plan  of  action  so  far  perfected  in  detail  as  to  enable  him  to  set  forth 
in  his  preliminary  notice  the  more  prominent  features  of  his  plan.  Thus  the  law 
requires  that  the  posted  and  recorded  notice  shall  state  the  purpose  for  which  water 
is  claimed  and  the  place  of  intended  use,  the  means  of  diversion,  and  the  size  of  the 
proposed  conduit.  Some  of  the>  smaller  claims  attempt  to  do  this  in  good  faith,  but 
it  is  a  more  popular  custom  to  evade  these  requirements  by  the  broadest  generalities. 
This  is  especially  noticeable  in  the  larger  claims  which  are  generally  for  speculative 
purposes.  It  is  common  to  find  notic.es  claiming  for  all  possible  purposes  which  the 
ingenuity  of  the  claimant  can  devise,  and  specifying  nearly  the  whole  of  southern 
California  as  the  place  of  intended  use,  that  the  diversion  is  to  be  accomplished  by 
means  of  "headworks,"  and  the  water  is  to  be  conveyed  by  "conduits  of  sufficient 
size  to  carry  the  said  amount."  Sometimes  the  latter  clause  is  expanded  to  include 
every  form  of  conduit  known  to  the  claimant — for  example:  "By  tunnels,  cuts, 
earthen,  litches;  canals  lined  with  masonry,  concrete,  stone,  brick,  or  other  materials; 
flumes  of  wood  or  metal;  pipes  of  wood,  steel,  iron,  cement,,  vitrified  clay,  or  other 
substances;  all  to  be  of  sufficient  size  for  the  purpose,"  or,  "of  such  size  as  a 
competent  hydraulic  engineer  may  recommend." 

Although  the  claimants  are  usually  most  liberal  to  themselves,  wording  their 
claims. in  phrases  broad  enough  to  cover  all  future  contingencies,  instances  are  num- 
erotts  in  which  the  notice  shows  that  its  author  had  no  adequate  conception  of  the 
quantity  of  water  claimed  or  the  carrying  capacity  of  the  specified  conduit.  One 
proposes  to  divert  200  inches  by  means  of  an  iron  pipe  2  inches  in  diameter  for  the 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  335 

first  40  feet,  thence  1  inch  to  the  place  of  intended  use  (a  considerable  distance  away). 
Another  claims  "3,000  inches  of  water  under  a  4-inch  pressure  in  this  canyon  and  its 
branches,  to  be  taken  out  in  a  pipe  1£  inches  i'1  diameter."  The  performance  of  this 
feat  would  require  the  water  to  pass  through  the  1^-inch  pipe  at  the  rate  of  almost 
1  mile  a  second,  or  about  three  times  the  velocity  of  a  rifle  bullet.  Another  claims 
3,000  inches,  "to  be  taken  out  in  a  ditch  15  inches  wide  and  10  inches  deep."  It 
would  be  interesting  to  know  how  long  the  ditch  would  endure  the  wear  of  such  a 
destructive  velocity  as  would  be  required.  One  prudent  and  farsighted  man,  after 
claiming  a  liberal  flow  of  water  and  describing  the  ordinary  means  of  diverting  the 
same,  provides  for  the  emergencies  of  future  dry  years  by  adding,  "I  also  claim  the 
right  to  hand  or  pack  from  here  to  said  ranch  in  case  of  drought  or  too  little  to  run 
down." 

From  one  cause  or  another  the  great  mass  of  recorded  notices  wholly  fail  to  per- 
form the  duty  they  were  designed  to  fulfill.  Probably  the  majority  possess,  or  at  one 
time  have  possessed,  some  value  to  the  claimant,  but  they  usually  fail  to  give  such 
notice  to  the  public  as  the  latter  is  entitled  to  expect  when  public  property  is  sought 
to  be  taken  for  private  use.  If  the  claimant  proceeds  diligently  and  uninterruptedly 
with  the  construction  of  his  works  and  actually  appropriates  the  water  as  claimed 
in  his  notice,  ho  is  entitled  to  have  the  right  thereby  acquired  date  back  to  the  time 
of  posting  the  said  notice.  In  this  event  it  may  be  important,  although  by  no  means 
indispensable,  to  have  an  official  record  of  the  fact.  Unfortunately  it  is  the  excep- 
tion rather  than  the  rule  that  a  claim  is  ripened  into  an  appropriation  according  to 
the  terms  of  the  notice  or  in  the  manner  and  within  the  time  specified  by  law.  In  all 
such  cases  the  recorded  notice  of  claim  is  false  and  misleading,  and  with  the  lapse  of 
time  may  acquire  a  force  and  standing  to  which  it  is  in  no  wise  entitled. 

In  California  there  is  no  officer  authorized  to  scrutinize  in  any  manner  any 
water  claim  offered  for  record,  nor  whose  duty  it  is  to  see  whether  the  rights  claimed 
by  such  notice  are  actually  secured  by  the  subsequent  actions  of  the  claimant,  or 
whether  they  are  allowed  to  expire  by  reason  of  his  default.  Vital  questions  touch- 
ing prior  rights  to  the  water,  the  validity  of  the  new  claimant's  preliminary  notice, 
the  good  faith  of  his  late  proceedings,  in  fact  the  whole  question  as  to  whether  an 
appropriation  for  a  beneficial  use  has  been  made,  and,  if  so,  to  what  extent,  are  one 
and  all  left  to  be  determined  by  litigation.  Under  our  present  law,  or  lack  of  law, 
on  this  point  there  is  no  other  manner  in  which  these  questions  can  be  decided.  It 
is  matter  of  common  knowledge  in  this  portion  of  the  State  that  a  lawsuit  over  water 
rights  is  the  most  protracted  and  costly  form  of  litigation  with  which  our  courts  are 
congested. 

LITIGATION. 

It  was  stated  above  that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  has  long  asserted  a  claim  to  the 
entire  flow  of  the  Los  Angeles  River,  basing  its  claim  principally  upon  its  succession 
to  the  peculiar  rights  alleged  to  have  been  granted  to  the  old  pueblo  founded  under 
Spanish  law  in  1781.  It  might  have  been  expected  that  this  supposed  sole  ownership 
would  operate  to  prevent  litigation.  On  the  contrary,  it  has  itself  been  the  fruitful 
source  of  much  costly  litigation.  Kither  as  plaintiff  or  defendant  the  city  of  Los 
Angeles  has  been  of  necessity  a  party  to  most  of  the  important  suits  involving  Los 
Angeles  River,  and  its  "pueblo  right"  has  been  repeatedly  on  trial. 


336  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN   CALIFORNIA. 

The  first  case  to  reach  the  supreme  court  of  California  in  which  "pueblo  right" 
of  the  city  was  asserted  is  that  of  the  Citj"  of  Los  Angeles  r.  Leon  McL.  Baldwin  et 
al.,  January,  1879,  reported  in  53  Cal.,  469. 

In  a  previous  action  between  the  above-named  parties  the  plaintiff  city  alleged 
that  the  pueblo  of  Los  Angeles  was  entitled  to  and  had  claimed  and  used  all  the  water 
of  Los  Angeles  River  ever  since  its  founding,  and  that  the  city  succeeded  to  all  the 
rights  of  the  pueblo.  It  further  alleged  that  a  certain  ditch  leading  from  the  river 
into  the  city  had  been  built  by  a  third  party  and  leased  to  the  cit3T,  which  was  then 
using  it  to  supply  its  inhabitants  with  water;  that  defendants,  who  were  owners  in 
the  Los  Feliz  Rancho,  riparian  to  the  river,  had  diverted  water  from  the  ditch  and 
threatened  to  continue  doing  so.  Wherefore  plaintiff  asked  for  injunction  and 
damages. 

Defendants,  in  their  answer,  denied  plaintiff's  ownership  of  the  river,  or  of  the 
water  flowing  in  the  ditch,  alleging  that  they  themselves  had  built  the  ditch  and 
granted  it  to  the  third  party,  from  whom  the  city  had  leased  it.  They  alleged  that 
one  of  the  conditions  in  the  grant  was  that  defendants  should  be  entitled  to  use  from 
the  ditch  all  the  water  required  for  their  rancho;  that  as  riparian  owners  they  were 
entitled  to  the  reasonable  use  of  the  water  of  the  river  for  irrigation  and  domestic 
purposes;  that  they  and  their  grantors  had  continuously,  since  1853,  used  the  water 
flowing  in  the  ditch  to  the  extent  of  two  "irrigation  heads"  (a  head  being  about  100 
inches),  and  that  they  had  never  used  more  than  such  reasonable  amount. 

The  trial  court  found  for  the  defendants  substantially  according  to  their  answer, 
stating  plainly  that  since  the  granting  of  the  ranch  in  18-13  defendants  and  their 
predecessors  had  continuously  claimed  and  exercised  "adversely  to  plaintiff  and  the 
whole  world  "  the  right  to  use  two  irrigating  heads  of  water  from  the  river  through 
the  said  ditch,  and  that  the  defendants  had  never  used  more  than  they  were  fairly 
entitled  to  as  riparian  proprietors.  The  court  found,  further,  that  at  the  time  the 
action  was  begun  there  was  a  surplus  of  water  in  the  river  and  in  the  ditch  above 
what  was  needed  for  irrigation  in  the  city,  which  surplus  plaintiff  was  selling  to 
consumers  outside  the  city  limits.  There  was  no  finding  as  to  the  right  or  title  of 
the  city  in  or  to  the  water  of  the  river. 

The  city  did  not  appeal  from  this  judgment,  but  after  the  lapse  of  some  time 
brought  another  suit  covering  practically  the  same  ground.  The  complaint  in  the 
second  case  alleged  "  that  the  plaintiff  is  and  for  a  long  time  has  been  the  owner  of 
the  waters  of  the  river  and  is  entitled  to  the  full,  free,  and  exclusive  use  of  the  waters 
of  the  river  and  the  waters  flowing  in  the  ditches  connected  with  the  river,  and  has 
the  right  to  regulate  and  control  the  use  and  distribution  thereof." 

The  answer  denies  the  exclusive  right  of  the  city  to  the  waters  of  the  river  or 
ditches,  and  denies  the  right  of  the  city  to  regulate  and  control  the  use  and  distribu- 
tion of  the  waters.  It  alleges  that  the  city  has  more  water  in  the  ditches  than  is 
needed  for  irrigation  within  the  city,  and  that  the  surplus  is  being  sold  to  parties 
outside  the  city.  It  also  sets  up  in  bar  the  former  judgment. 

The  trial  court  found  that  the  second  action  was  substantially  the  same  as  the 
former  or>e  between  the  same  parties,  which  had  been  decided  in  favor  of  defendants. 
It  also  found  "that  the  plaintiff  had  shown  no  grant  of  the  waters  of  the  river  other 
than  such  as  inured  to  it  from  the  fact  that  the  river  flowed  through  the  lands  of  the 


WATER    BIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    KIVER.  337 

pueblo  mid  of  the  city."     Also  that  surplus  waters  were  being  sold  by  the  city  to 
consumers  outside  the  city. 

Upon  appeal  by  the  city  the  supreme  court  decided: 

(1)  The  claim  set  up  by  the  city  in  this  action— that  the  city  is  the  owner  of  the  corpus  of  the 
water  in  the  Los  Angeles  River — finds  no  support  in  the  evidence. 

(2)  Nor  does  the  fact  that  the  city  is  a  lower  riparian  proprietor  entitle  her  to  judgment  in  her 
favor.     The  defendants  are  upper  riparian  proprietors  on  the  same  stream.     In  the  former  action 
between  these  parties  it  was  adjudged  that  the  diversion  ()f  the  water  by  the  defendants  to  the  extent 
and  in  the  manner  in  which  they  then  diverted  it  was  such  as,  being  riparian  proprietors,  they  might 
lawfully  make.     The  conditions  do  not  appear  to  be  different  now  from  what  they  then  were.     The 
diversion  by  the  defendants  is  the  same  now  as  then,  and  while  these  conditions  continue  unchanged 
the  judgment  rendered  in  the  former  action  operates  as  a  bar  between  the  parties  here. 

LOS   ANGELES   WATER   COMPANY  v.    LOS   ANGELES   CITY. 

The  case  of  Los  Angeles  Water  Company  v.  Los  Angeles  City  was  decided  by 
the  supreme  court  in  April,  1880.  It  WHS  reported  in  55  Cal.,  176.  The  city  owned 
the  Los  Angeles  waterworks,  which  it  leased  to  the  water  company  "  for  the  sale 
or  delivery  of  water  to  the  inhabitants  of  said  city  for  domestic  purposes."  One  of 
the  expressed  conditions  of  the  contract  was  to  the  effect  that  the  water  company 
should  not  dispose  of  any  water  for  irrigation  purposes,  but  should  take  from  the 
river  only  such  an  amount  as  was  necessary  for  domestic  purposes.  The  city  took 
water  from  the  water  company's  pipes  without  its  consent,  and  after  a  time  the 
company  sued  to  recover  $2,500,  the  value  of  the  water  so  taken. 

The  fact  was  established  that  at  all  times  when  water  was  taken  from  the 
company's  pipes  for  street  sprinkling  the  pipes  contained  more  of  the  water  of  Los 
Angeles  River  than  was  required  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  for  domestic  purposes. 
.Judgment  was  rendered  for  the  city.  Upon  appeal  by  the  plaintiff,  the  supreme 
court  held  that  under  the  contract  between  the  parties  the  water  company  was  not 
entitled  to  collect  payment  for  water  other  than  that  furnished  to  the  inhabitants  of 
the  city  for  domestic  purposes;  that  the  company  had  no  right  to  the  surplus,  and 
that  "water  taken  for  the  purpose  of  sprinkling  the  streets  was  water  for  irrigation 
within  the  primary  definition  of  that  word." 

FELIZ  v.  CITY  OF  LOS  ANGELES. 

The  pueblo  right  was  again  put  upon  trial  in  the  case  of  Anastacio  Feliz  et  al. 
v.  The  City  of  Los  Angeles,  decided  by  the  supreme  court  in  April,  1881,  and 
reported  in  58  Cal.,  73.  Plaintiffs  claimed  by  riparian  right  and  many  years' 
continuous  use,  as  did  Baldwin  in  the  original  case  noted  above,  but  in  this  instance 
the  city  urged  its  peculiar  and  exclusive  right  to  better  effect  and  made  out  a  much 
stronger  case  than  in  the  earlier  suit  involving  the  same  question.  Inasmuch  as  the 
findings  of  the  lower  court  are  very  comprehensive  and  contain  the  statement  of 
facts  necessary  to  an  understanding  of  the  decision,  the  following  abstract  is  made 
therefrom: 

( 1 )  That  in  the  year  1781,  pursuant  to  the  laws  of  Spain  and  the  rules  and  regulations  providing  for 
the  government  of  California,  Los  Angeles  was  duly  formed  into  a  pueblo,  and  became  entitled  to  all 
the  rights  of  a  pueblo  according  to  said  laws,  rules,  and  regulations,  and  all  its  rights  as  such  pueblo 
since  then  were  duly  recognized  and  allowed  by  the  Spanish  and  Mexican  Governments  during  their 
respective  occupation  and  control  of  the  same,  and  also  by  the  respective  provincial  and  departmental 
authorities  of  California. 

23856— No.  100—01 22 


338  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

(2)  That  the  river  of  Los  Angeles  rises  several  miles  above  the  former  pueblo  of  Los  Angeles  and 
runs  down  through  said  pueblo,  and  during  the  occupation  and  control  of  said  pueblo  by  the  Mexican 
Government  the  municipal  authorities  at  all  times  exercised  control  of  and  claimed  the  exclusive  riirht 
to  use  the  waters  of  said  river  and  all  thereof,  which  right  was  duly  recognized,  acknowledged,  and 
allowed  by  the  owners  of  the  land  at  the  source  and  bordering  on  said  river,  including  the  grantors  of 
the  plaintiffs;  and  that  ever  since  the  occupation  and  control  of  said  pueblo  by  the  <  iovernment  of  the 
United  States  and  that  of  the  State  of  California  the  municipal  authorities  of  what  is  now  the  city  of 
Los  Angeles  have  exercised  the  same  control  and  claimed  the  same  right  in  regard  to  the  water  of  said 
river  as  was  previously  done  by  the  authorities  of  said  pueblo,  except  within  the  last  two  or  three 
years,  when  the  right  of  said  city  to  said  waters  has  been  disputed  by  the  plaintiffs  and  others,  and  a 
right  claimed  by  them  to  use  said  waters;  that  the  municipal  authorities  of  said  pueblo  and  city 
exercised  control  of  said  waters,  and  claimed  the  exclusive  right  to  their  use  as  aforesaid,  for  the 
purpose  of  irrigating  the  lands  of  said  pueblo  and  city,  and  for  domestic  use  of  the  inhabitants  thereof. 
******* 

(5)  That  the  water  of  said  river  is  necessary  for  the  irrigation  of  the  land  within  said  city,  and  so 
confirmed  as  aforesaid,  and  also  for  the  domestic  use  of  its  inhabitants,  but  until  within  the  last  two 
or  three  years  all  of  said  water  has  not  been  required  in  said  city.     For  the  last  few  years  during  the 
irrigating  season,  all  of  said  waters,  as  they  naturally  flow  in  said  raver,  have  not  been  sufficient  for 
the  irrigation  of  the  irrigable  portion  of  said  lands  and  the  domestic  use  of  said  inhabitants;  and  said 
city,  at  an  expense  of  more  than  $100,000,  has  constructed  reservoirs  to  husband  and  save  said  waters 
for  uses  in  said  city;  that  a  large  portion  of  the  irrigable  lands  of  said  city  are  not  irrigated,  and  never 
have  been  irrigated,  which  will  require  more  than  all  the  waters  of  said  river,  with  present  facilities 
and  resources  of  said  city  for  husbanding  and  supplying  the  same.     That  said  city  has  been  supplying 
the  inhabitants  of  said  city  with  said  water  for  uses  aforesaid,  and  when  there  has  been  more  than  has 
been  required  for  use  in  the  city  it  has  and  still  does  sell  to  parties  residing  without,  and  to  be  used  on 
lands  without  the  city. 

(6)  That  ever  since  about  the  year  1844  the  plaintiffs  and  their  grantors  have  owned,  possessed, 
and  cultivated  the  land  claimed   by  them  in  their  complaints,  and  have  ever  since  irrigated  the 
same  from  said  river  through  the  respective  ditches  maintained  in  the  respective  complaints,  to  wit: 
The  Chavez  and  Felix  ditches,  to  about  the  same  extent  as  now  irrigated  by  the  plaintiffs  using  the 
water,  also  for  domestic  purposes;  and  the  waters  of  said  river  are  necessary  for  the  irrigation  of  said 
lands  and  for  domestic  use.     But  the  uses  of  said  waters  were  originally  by  permission  and  under 
consent  from  the  municipal  authorities  of  said  pueblo,  and  have  ever  since  been  with  such  permission 
and  consent,  and  not  adversely  nor  claimed  as  of  right  until  within  the  last  three  years,  during  which 
time  (the  last  three  years)  plaintiffs  have  claimed,  and  still  claim,  the  right  to  use  said  waters  on  their 
land  and  for  domestic  purposes. 

(7)  That  plaintiffs  are  the  respective  owners  of  the  parcels  of  land  claimed  by  them  in  this 
complaint,  and  the  respective  ditches  therein  referred  to  are  used  and  are  necessary  to  irrigate  the 
same;  and  said  ditches  have  always  been  in  the  exclusive  possession  and  cpntrol  of  said  plaintiffs  and 
their  grantors  from  about  the  year  1844  until  the  25th  day  of  May,  1879. 

(8)  That  on  the  25th  day  of  May,  1879,  the  plaintiffs  were,  respectively,  and  for  several  days  prior 
thereto,  diverting  through  said  ditches,  to  the  extent  of  about  100  square  inches  in  each  of  said  ditches, 
the  waters  of  said  river  to  and  upon  their  respective  tracts  of  land  aforesaid,  and  using  the  same 
thereon  for  irrigation  and  domestic  purposes,  and  the  same  was  no  more  than  was  reasonable  and 
necessary  therefor.     By  reason  of  such  use  by  plaintiffs  water  became  diminished  in  said  river,  and 
sufficient  thereof  could  not  and  did  not  reach  said  city  or  its  waterworks  (plaintiffs'  said  ditches  having 
their  points  of  diversion  above  said  city  and  its  waterworks)  to  supply  what  was  reasonable  and 
necessary  for  irrigation  and  domestic  use  in  said  city;  and  by  reason  of  such  diversion  by  plaintiffs  a 
number  of  the  inhabitants  of  said  city  were  deprived  of  what  was  reasonable  and  necessary  for  the 
irrigation  of  their  land  in  said  city,  and  for  their  domestic  purposes;  and  the  defendant  city  lost  on  its 
Sale  of  said  waters  more  than  $50  on  account  of  the  diversion  in  each  of  said  ditches,  respectively. 
Whereupon,  on  that  day,  and  in  order  to  supply  the  inhabitants  and  land  of  said  city  with  sufficient 
water  for  said  purposes,  and  in  order  to  regulate  and  control  the  distribution  of  said  waters  in  the 
most  beneficial  and  regular  manner,  the  said  city,  by  its  officers  and  agents,  entered  upon  said  ditches 
at  their  respective  heads  and  returned  the  water  therein  to  said  river  and  placed  therein  headgates. 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVKU.  339 

The  findings  of  the  court,  as  above  quoted,  seem  to  support  the  city's  contention 
in  everj'  respect,  It  is,  therefore,  most  surprising  to  read  that  judgment  was  given 
for  the  plaintiffs.  It  was  to  the  effect  that,  being  riparian  owners,  the  plaintiffs 
were  entitled  to  divert  a  reasonable  amount  of  water  from  the  river  for  irrigation 
and  domestic  use.  The  decree  perpetually  enjoined  the  city  from  interfering  with 
the  ditches  or  with  the  plaintiffs'  use,  upon  their  said  land,  of  a  reasonable  quantity 
of  the  river  water  for  irrigation  and  domestic  purposes.  This  decision  of  the  lower 
court  can  only  be  regarded  as  evidence  of  the  peculiar  sanctity  with  which  riparian 
rights  are  clothed  in  nearly  all  courts.  Here  almost  every  ascertained  fact  was 
against  the  applicability  of  the  English  common  law ;  nevertheless  judgment  was 
rendered  in  favor  of  perpetuating  that  doctrine  in  a  region  where  its  use  is  an 
absurdity. 

The  city  appealed.  In  its  decision  the  supreme  court  quotes  at  length  from  the 
findings  of  the  lower  court,  noting  the  facts  that  for  a  century  the  city  claimed  all 
the  waters  of  the  river,  and  that  ''such  claim  had  been  recognized  by  all  persons 
interested,  from  the  head  of  the  stream  and  along  its  bunks,  including  the  plaintiffs." 
The  decision  of  the  lower  court  is  reversed  and  judgment  ordered  for  defendant  upon 
the  findings. 

The  supreme  court  says  that  it  did  not  examine  the  rights  of  the  city  "under 
the  Spanish  and  Mexican  laws  applicable  to  pueblos,  for  the  findings  in  the  case  ren- 
der such  examination  unnecessary,"  but  it  goes  on  record  touching  one  branch  of  the 
city's  asserted  right  as  follows: 

We  do  not  intend  to  be  understood  as  holding,  nor  do  we  hold,  that  the  city  has  the  right  at 
any  time  to  dispose  of  the  water  for  use  upon  lands  situated  without  the  limits,  to  the  injury  of  the 
plaintiffs  or  other  owners  of  land  hordering  on  the  river.  On  the  contrary,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that 
the  city  has  not  that  right.  But  as  already  observed,  the  findings  in  this  case  show  that  at  the  time 
of  the  acts  complained  of  there  was  nut  sufficient  water  in  the  river  for  the  needs  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  city;  and  we  hold  that,  to  the  extent  of  the  needs  of  the  inhabitants,  it  has  the  paramount  right 
to  the  use  of  the  waters  of  the  river,  and  the  further  right,  long  exercised  and  recognized,  as  appears 
from  the  findings,  to  manage  and  control  the  said  waters  for  those  purposes. 

ELMS   v.   CITY   OF  LOS   ANGELES. 

The  case  of  Henry  Elms  et  al.  v.  The  City  of  Los  Angeles,  reported  in  58  Cal., 
80,  was  another  case  involving  the  city's  pueblo  right.  The  facts  and  the  arguments 
were  the  same  as  in  the  preceding  case,  and  the  judgment  of  the  lower  court  in  favor 
of  the  plaintiff  was  likewise  reversed  by  the  supreme  court  on  appeal. 

VERNON  IRRIGATION   COMPANY  v.  CITY  OF  LOS  ANGELES. 

The  pueblo  right  claimed  by  the  city  is  once  more  the  principal  issue  in  the  case 
of  The  Vernon  Irrigation  Company  v.  The  City  of  Los  Angeles  etal.,  decided  by  the 
supreme  court  in  March,  1895,  and  reported  in  106  Cal.,  237.  The  plaintiff  corpora- 
tion, the  owner  of  lands  riparian  to  Los  Angeles  River,  alleges  that  it  is  entitled  to 
have  the  waters  of  the  river  flow  in  their  accustomed  place,  and  sues  for  an  injunction 
to  prevent  the  city  from  diverting  them.  The  plaintiff  further  alleges  that  the  city 
has  no  right  to  the  river  waters  except  "the  right  to  divert  and  use  a  certain 
quantity,  which  it  has  been  using,  for  municipal  purposes  and  distributing  to  its 
inhabitants,  which  does  not  exceed  300  inches;"  that  the  city  threatens  to  enlarge  its 
ditches  so  as  to  divert  the  entire  flow  of  the  river  for  the  purpose  of  selling  the  same 


340  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

outside  the  city  limits;  that  plaintiff  owns  a  water  right,  acquired  by  appropriation, 
to  divert  from  the  river  2,100  inches. 

The  answer  of  the  city  denies  plaintiff's  rights  and  claims  all  the  water  of  the 
river: 

(1)  As  successor  of  the  pueblo  of  Los  Angeles,  which  it  contends  owned  all  the  water  in  the 
river.  (2)  As  an  appropriator  of  the  water,  claiming  that  it  has  been  in  the  undisturbed  and 
undisputed  use  of  it,  under  claim  of  right,  for  fifty  years. 

A  full  statement  of  the  facts  is  contained  in  the  opinion  of  the  supreme  court, 
which  is  voluminous,  covering  nearly  twenty  pages  of  the  report.  The  opinion  also 
quotes  at  length  from  the  findings  of  the  lower  court  and  abstracts  from  briefs  of 
counsel  much  interesting  history  of  the  organization  and  administration  of  the  pueblo 
under  Spanish  and  Mexican  laws.  Following  is  a  brief  outline  of  portions  touching 
the  subject  of  our  inquiry: 

The  waters  of  all  rivers  were,  under  the  Spanish  and  Mexican  rule,  public  property,  to  be 
administered  and  distributed  for  the  use  of  the  inhabitants.  Apparently  this  was  sometimes  done  by 
the  pueblo  authorities  outside  of  the  pueblo  lands.  When  the  pueblo  was  organized  under 

the  laws  a  sufficiency  of  this  water  was  appropriated  to  it.  *  *  The  pueblo  had  a  prior  right  to 
consume  the  waters,  even  as  against  the  upper  riparian  proprietor.  *  *  *  The  court  approves  the 
decision  of  the  supreme  court  in  Lux  r.  Haggin  (69  Gal.,  255),  to  the  effect  that  the  right  of  the  city  as 
successor  to  the  pueblo  to  the  water,  for  its  inhabitants  and  for  municipal  purposes,  is  superior  to  the 
rights  of  plaintiffs  as  a  riparian  owner.  Approval  is  also  given  to  the  decision  of  the  court  in  Feliz  r. 
City  of  Los  Angeles,  above  noted,  that  the  city  has  no  right  to  take  from  the  river  more  water  than  is 
required  for  its  inhabitants  and  for  municipal  purposes  and  to  sell  the  same  outside  the  city.  *  *  * 
Pueblo  had  preferred  right  to  the  water,  but  only  to  the  amount  needed  for  its  inhabitants.  *  *  * 
The  city's  claim  that  it  has  acquired  a  right  by  appropriation -of  fifty  years'  standing  to  sell  surplus 
water  outside  its  limits  is  denied  by  the  court  on  the  ground  that  under  its  charter  tin-  city  had  no 
power  to  do  this,  and  hence  that  it  could  secure  no  such  right  by  the  unauthorized  acts  of  its  officers. 
This  right  may  have  existed  at  one  time,  but  subsequent  limitations  in  the  city's  charter  amounted  to 
an  abandonment  thereof. 

CITY  OF  LOS  ANGELES   v.   POMEROY  ET  AL. 

The  pueblo  right  was  again  tested  in  the  case  of  City  of  Los  Angeles  v.  Pomeroy 
et  al.,  reported  in  124  Cal.,  597,  and  57  Pac.  Rep.,  585.  This  suit  was  begun  in 
June,  1893,  came  to  trial  in  March,  1896,  and  was  decided  in  the  superior  court  in 
June,  1899.  It  is  a  case  of  colossal  dimensions.  A  large  number  of  engineering 
expert  witnesses  were  introduced  on  both  sides.  The  transcript  on  appeal  is  a 
voluminous  document,  and  the  opinion  of  the  court  covers  nearly  fiftv  pages  of 
the  report. 

Defendants  were  the  owners  of  a  large  tract  of  land  situated  in  the  southern 
portion  of  the  San  Fernando  Valley,  near  its  outlet,  and  at  a  point  where  the  valley 
has  narrowed  to  a  width  of  2  to  3  miles.  The  citj7  sought  to  condemn  all  the  right, 
title,  and  interest  of  defendants  in  a  portion  of  the  said  tract  containing  about  315 
acres.  This  land,  comprising  a  strip  about  2  miles  long  by  one-fourth  mile  wide  and 
traversed  by  the  river  throughout  its  length,  was  wanted  for  the  purpose  of 
constructing  suitable  headworks  for  the  proposed  extension  of  the  city's  waterworks. 
Defendants  claimed  that  the  land  sought  to  be  condemned  contained  an  enormous 
quantity  of  percolating  water  capable  of  development,  upon  which  they  put  si  high 
valuation,  which  they  claimed  ought  to  be  paid  them  if  their  land  was  taken  for 
public  use. 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGKLKS    RIVER.  341 

The  main  issuo  involved  in  the  case  is  complicated  with  a  large  number  of 
subordinate  questions,  the  decision  of  the  supreme  court  embracing  twenty-five 
distinct  points.  Most  of  them,  however,  relate  to  legal  technicalities,  and  two 
questions  only  are  prominent  in  the  controversy.  These  are — 

(1)  As  to  tin'  existence  of  a  well-defined  subterranean  stream  by  which  the  waters,  or  a  large 
portion  of  the  waters,  resulting  from  the  rainfall  within  the  watershed  of  the  San  Fernando  Valley, 
arc  carried  off  through  the  pass  between  the  Cahuenga  Range  and  the  Verdnga  hills;  and,  (2)  as  to 
the  rights  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  as  successor  to  the  Mexican  pueblo  in  the  Los  Angeles  River. 

Regarding  these  two  points  the  city  alleges  that  it  has  certain  rights  in  the  river 
superior  to  those  of  ordinary  riparian  proprietors;  that  the  river  is  composed  of  the 
surface  stream  and  a  large  subterranean  stream  moving  through  the  sand,  gravel, 
and  bowlders  under  and  adjacent  to  the  river;  "that  ever  since  its  organization  the 
city  has  been  the  owner  in  fee  simple  of  the  exclusive  right  to  the  use  of  all  the 
waters  in  said  river  from  its  source  to  the  southern  boundary  of  the  city,  in  trust,  for 
the  public  purposes  of  supplying  the  inhabitants  of  said  city  with  water  for  domestic 
uses,  and  of  supplying  water  for  the  irrigable  lands  embraced  in  the  4  square  leagues 
of  the  pueblo,  and  for  other  municipal  uses;"  also  that  the  defendants  own  their  land 
subject  to  the  right  of  the  city  in  the  Los  Angeles  River. 

Omitting  such  points  of  the  decision  as  relate  to  legal  technicalities,  the  following 
are  quoted  from  the  syllabus: 

Perco/ntliii/  miter — Subterranean  flow  of  river — Value  of  land. — Percolating  water  which  forms  part 
of  the  subterranean  flow  of  Los  Angeles  River,  and  is  moving  in  the  same  direction  with  it,  through 
the  lands  sought  to  be  condemned,  does  not  belong  to  the  owner  of  the  soil,  and  can  not  be  taken  and 
conveyed  away  by  him  to  other  lands  for  sale;  and  where  the  supply  of  the  percolating  water  which 
might  be  so  removed  is  of  slight  value,  and  might  be  wholly  interfered  with  by  drainage  on  adjoining 
lands,  a  verdict  fixing  the  value  of  the  land  at  its  market  value  for  agricultural  purposes  will  not  he 
disturbed  upon  appeal. 

Percolation  not  inconsistent  with  stream — Defined  channel. — The  fact  of  percolation  is  not  inconsistent 
with  the  idea  of  a  stream,  when  it  is  caused  by  the  waters  of  a  subterranean  stream  passing  through 
the  voids  of  loose,  permeable  material,  or  partially  obstructing  the  channel  of  the  stream,  and  when 
the  material  through  which  the  water  forces  itself  fills  a  well-defined  channel  with  impervious  sides 
and  bed. 

Diversion  of  underflow  or  percolating  water. — The  owner  of  the  soil  can  not  divert  any  part  of  the 
underflow  of  (or?)  subterranean  water  forming  part  of  the  stream,  whether  such  water  would  or  would 
not  reach  Jhe  surface  stream  of  the  river;  nor  can  he  divert  percolating  water  if  the  effect  would  be  to 
cause  the  water  of  the  stream  to  leave  its  bed  to  fill  the  void  caused  by  such  diversion. 

Nature  of  subterranean  stream — Question  of  law. — What  a  subterranean  stream  must  be  in  order  to 
bring  it  within  the  law  ot  riparian  rights  is  a  question  of  law. 

" Defined"  and  "known"  channel — Reasonable  inference. — The  channel  of  a  subterranean  stream 
is  "defined"  when  it  is  contracted  and  bounded,  though  the  course  of  the  stream  may  be  undefined 
to  human  knowledge;  and  its  course  is  sufficiently  "known"  when  it  is  the  subject  of  reasonable 
inference. 

Inference  as  to  diannel— Submission  to  jury.— Where  the  boundaries  of  the  channel  and  the 
existence  and  course  of  a  subterranean  stream  in  the  lands  sought  to  be  condemned  are  not  defined  or 
known  otherwise  than  by  inference  from  the  evidence,  and  it  might  reasonably  be  inferred  therefrom 
that  the  channel  was  bounded  and  defined  by  the  sloping  sides  of  hills  meeting  underground,  and  that 
there  was  a  subsurface  flow  in  the  channel  through  such  lands,  corresponding  with  the  known  surface 
flow  of  the  river  outward  through  the  gap,  the  court  was  justified  in  submitting  to  the  jury  whether 
the  subsurface  flow  in  such  lands  was  a  part  of  the  stream. 

Extent  of  paramount  rights  of  r.'ttij— Riparian  rights  of  Mexican  grantees. — The  paramount  rights  of 
the  city  of  Los  Angeles  in  the  waters  of  Los  Angeles  River  over  the  riparian  rights  of  persons  claiming 
under  Spanish  and  Mexican  grants  arc  not  limited  to  water  sufficient  to  supply  the  original  pueblo, 


342  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

to  which  the  city  was  a  successor;  but  the  extension  (if  its  limits  by  increase  of  the  population  must 
be  deemed  within  the  purview  of  the  original  grant  of  those  waters  to  the  pueblo,  and  the  effect  of  the 
grant  must  be  deemed  the  same  as  if  the  waters  had  been  condemned  for  public  use,  and  all  possi- 
bilities of  the  future  growth  and  requirements  of  the  city  were  taken  into  consideration. 

Outfall  sewer. — The  water  having  been  granted  or  dedicated  for  the  health  and  convenience  of  the 
pueblo,  as  well  as  for  other  purposes,  the  right  to  drain  the  city  by  means  of  an  outfall  sewer,  and  to 
keep  it  in  a  state  of  efficiency  by  the  necessary  flushing,  is  within  the  pueblo  right. 

Ponds  and  artificial  lake* — l>isi-n'/ion  nf  city. — The  needs  of  the  city  may  extend  to  the  use  of  water 
for  ponds  and  artificial  lakes;  and  the  discretion  of  the  municipal  authorities  in  such  use  will  not  be 
interfered  with  where  110  gross  abuse  of  such  discretion  is  manifest. 

Sunpriixioii  of  iii/iintiniiii'iilii. — The  suspension  of  the  ayuntumiento  ( town  council)  of  Los  Angeles 
under  the  Mexican  law  of  1837,  and  the  temporary  administration  of  its  affairs  by  a  prefect,  did  not 
affect  the  paramount  rights  of  the  pueblo  to  the  use  of  the  waters  of  Los  Angeles  River. 

The  pueblo  right  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  to  the  water  of  the  Los  Angeles  River 
may  now  he  fairly  regarded  as  firmly  established,  although  vhe  question  lias  never  yet 
been  taken  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and  of  course  until  it  is  finally 
decided  by  the  court  of  last  resort  the  possibility  of  its  overthrow  will  always  exist. 
According  to  the  supreme  court  of  California  the  city,  as  successor  to  the  Spanish 
pueblo,  has  a  paramount  right  to  all  waters  of  Los  Angeles  River,  whether  on  or 
beneath  the  surface,  to  the  extent  of  the  needs  of  the  inhabitants  for  irrigation  and 
domestic  purposes,  and  of  the  city  for  municipal  use;  this  right  is  not  limited  to  the 
amount  actually  used  by  the  pueblo,  nor  to  the  particular  purposes  for  which  water 
was  formerly  applied,  but  the  right  is  an  elastic  one,  growing  as  the  city  grows, 
and  capable  of  being  extended  to  include  every  use  to  which  water  may  properly  be 
applied  by  a  modern  municipal  government.  The  rapid  growth  of  the  city,  from 
11,000  in  1880  to  50,000  in  1890,  and  103,000  in  1900,  a  growth  of  more  than  100  per 
cent  in  the  last  decade,  has  led  the  city,  in  recent  years,  to  guard  with  jealous  care  its 
water  supply  so  as  to  provide  for  future  growth.  The  city's  right  to  Los  Angeles  River 
being  well  established,  the  only  question  remaining  is,  What  is  the  river?  Attempts 
to  determine  this  question  have  produced  several  lawsuits  of  enormous  dimensions  and 
corresponding  cost.  One  of  the  greatest  of  these,  the  case  of  The  City  of  Los  Angeles 
v.  Crystal  Springs  Land  and  Water  Company,  is  still  pending.  It  was  begun  in  1891 
and  has  not  yet  reached  the  supreme  court.  The  defendant,  a  corporation  closely 
affiliated  with  the  Los  Angeles  Water  Company,  laid  pipes  with  open  joints  designed 
to  admit  water,  in  close  proximity  to  the  river,  claiming  that  the  flow  secured  thereby 
was  water  developed  from  percolations  in  their  own  land.  The  city  claimed  that  the 
developed  water  was  part  of  Los  Angeles  River.  A  large  number  of  hydraulic 
engineers  were  introduced  as  expert  witnesses  by  both  sides. 

The  city  has  had  much  costly  litigation  with  the  Los  Angeles  Water  Company, 
to  whom  the  city's  waterworks  were  leased  in  1868  for  a  term  of  thirty  years.  In 
these  suits  the  questions  have  not  related  to  title  to  the  river  water,  but  have  turned 
upon  construction  of  the  contract,  the  method  of  appraising  value  of  the  company's 
property  which  the  city  desired  to  purchase,  the  validity  of  arbitrators'  award,  etc. 

THE  CITY  OF  LOS  ANGELES  v.  WEST  LOS  ANGELES  WATER  COMPANY. 

Another  important  case  involving  the  distinction  between  a  supposed  subter- 
ranean stream,  claimed  to  be  a  part  of  the  river,  and  percolating  water,  which  would 
be  considered  part  of  the  land,  and  therefore  the  property  of  the  owners  of  the  land, 
is  that  .bearing  the  above  title. 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  343 

The  West  Los  Angeles  Water  Company  is  the  owner  of  a  large  tract  of  land 
situated  in  the  San  Fernando  Valley,  at  some  distance  from  the  visible  Los  Angeles 
Kiver.  Operating  on  its  own  land,  the  company  constructed  a  number  of  open  cuts 
and  tunnels  containing  wooden  flumes  or  galleries  open  at  the  bottoms  for  the  admis- 
sion of  water,  and  in  this  manner  has  developed  a  flow  amounting  to  several  hundred 
inches  of  water.  The  city  again  asserts  its  "pueblo  right"  in  the  fullest  and  most 
explicit  terms,  and  alleges  that  in  1895  defendants  entered  upon  the  line  of  various 
branches  of  Los  Angeles  Kiver,  both  surface  and  subterranean,  and  without  right  or 
authority  excavated  certain  trenches,  ditches,  and  tunnels  whereby  not  less  than  400 
inches  of  water  were  diverted  and  the  natural  flow  in  the  river  diminished  by  that 
amount.  The  defendant  claims  that  the  water  is  developed  from  percolations  in  the 
soil,  not  a  part  of  the  river.  The  suit  was  begun  in  May,  1897,  and  is  now  set  for 
trial  in  November,  1900. 

DISTRIBUTION  AND  USE  OF  WATER. 

The  supply  of  water  for  irrigation  in  Los  Angeles  is  distributed  by  means  of  an 
extensive  and  intricate  system  of  zanjas,  maintained  and  administered  by  a  department 
of  the  city  government.  Regulations  governing  the  distribution  are  prescribed  by 
ordinances  of  the  city  council.  The  executive  officer  is  a  water  overseer,  who  has  a 
chief  deputy  and  two  outside  deputies  commonly  known  as  "zanjeros."  During  the 
summer  season,  from  April  1  to  November  1,  the  number  of  field  deputies  is  increased 
to  five. 

On  the  24th  or  25th  days  of  the  month  each  irrigator  who  desires  water  during 
the  ensuing  month  must  file  an  application  therefor,  filling  in  a  blank  form  provided 
by  the  city.  This  application  contains  the  name  of  the  irrigator,  number  of  the 
ditch  from  which  the  supply  is  to  be  drawn,  number  of  "heads"  of  "day  water"  or 
"night  water"  desired,  and  the  dates  when  wanted.  Sunrise  and  sunset  divide  the 
twenty -four  hours  into  day  and  night  runs.  The  basis  of  distribution  fixed  by  the  city 
council  is  one  irrigation  head  for  twenty-four  hours'  run  every  month  for  10  acres  of 
land.  The  "head"  is  an  imaginary  unit  whose  value  has  never  been  determined. 
For  the  sake  of  convenience  it  is  usually  estimated  as  amounting  to  100  inches,  but 
as  a  matter  of  fact  it  ranges  in  value  from  less  than  50  inches  to  more  than  150  inches, 
according  to  the  available  flow  of  the  river. 

The  number  of  "heads"  of  water  ordered  for  a  month  must  be  paid  for  in 
advance  not  later  than  the  30th  day  of  the  preceding  month.  In  acknowledgement 
of  such  payment  a  receipt  is  given  in  the  following  form: 

DAY. 

WATER  OVERSEER'S  OFFICE, 

Los  Angeles,  Cal, ,  1900. 

From  Sun  to  Sun. 

Received  from the  sum  of  four  dollars  for  the  use  of  zanja  No. for  the  purpose 

of  carrying  one  head  of  water  through  the  same  for  one  day  only. 

,  1900. 

,  Water  Overseer. 

,  Deputy. 

The  rate  per  half  day  is  $2.50.  A  receipt  in  the  same  terms,  but  printed  on 
paper  of  a  distinguishing  color,  substituting  night  for  day,  and  at  the  rate  of  $2 
instead  of  $4,  is  issued  for  night  runs. 

^OFTHt 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 


344  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Notwithstanding  the  decision  of  the  .supreme  court  that  the  city  has  no  authority 
to  sell  water  outside  its  limits  this  is  still  being  done  to  some  extent.  This  custom 
is  not  maintained  in  defiance  of  the  courts,  but  simply  because  it  is  a  physical  impos- 
sibility to  yield  exact  obedience  to  the  court's  decisions.  Occasions  sometimes  arise 
when  there  are  odd  hours  or  fractions  of  days  not  covered  by  applications  of  irriga- 
tors  within  the  city.  At  such  times  the  surplus  water  ought  not  to  be  diverted  from 
the  river  by  the  city,  but  it  should  be  allowed  to  flow  down  the  natural  channel  of 
the  river  for  the  benefit  of  riparian  owners.  This  is  obviously  impossible  under  the 
circumstances.  The  zanjas  are  many  miles  in  extent  and  hours  are  required  for  the 
passage  of  water  from  headgates  to  the  consumers.  The  attempt  to  perfectly  regu- 
late at  the  headgates  the  flow  in  each  ditch  would  lead  to  the  utmost  confusion  and 
result  in  much  loss  of  water.  Moreover,  small  quantities  of  water  allowed  to  flow 
down  the  river  bed  at  wide  intervals  of  time  would  accomplish  no  good  whatever, 
but  would  be  wholly  lost.  Under  these  conditions,  therefore,  it  is  the  practice  to 
allow  the  surplus  water  to  run  through  the  zanjas  to  the  lower  limits  of  the  city, 
there  to  be  taken  and  used  by  outsiders. 

Although  the  process  of  supplying  irrigators  is  usually  termed  "  selling  water," 
it  will  be  seen  from  the  above  form  of  receipt  that  it  is  technically  the  use  of  the 
ditch  which  is  sold  or  rented.  The  rate  charged  outsiders  is  $5  and  $2. 50  per  "head" 
for  day  and  night,  respectively.  It  will  be  noted  also  that  the  city  does  not  under- 
take to  supply  a  definite  quantit}'  of  water,  nor  does  it  assume  any  responsibility 
whatsoever.  The  irrigator  does  not  acquire  a  permanent  right  to  the  use  of  water; 
he  simply  rents  from  month  to  month  the  use  of  the  ditch  to  convey  his  pro  i-.ita 
share  of  the  available  supply,  taking  his  chances  against  losses  by  breaks  or  thefts. 
New  land  is  entitled  to  the  same  consideration  as  that  which  has  been  using  water  for 
many  years. 

The  growth  of  the  city  has  been  remarkably  rapid.  As  the  built-up  portions 
have  extended  over  the  farming  lands,  the  amount  of  water  taken  from  the  pressure 
system  of  the  city  for  domestic  purposes  has  increased  correspondingly,  while  the 
demand  for  irrigation  is  said  to  have  been  kept  about  the  same  from  year  to  year  by 
successive  extensions  of  the  city  boundaries.  The  result  has  been  a  demand  upon  the 
river  greater  than  ever  before,  and  greater  than  it  is  capable  of  meeting  under 
existing  conditions. 

The  methods  of  distributing  irrigation  water  practiced  by  the  city  of  Los  Angeles 
are  astonishingly  crude  and  unsatisfactory.  It  would  be  impossible  to  find  another 
system  in  California — in  the  southern  portion  at  least,  and  probably  not  elsewhere  in 
the  State — where  such  unscientific  means  are  still  employed.  The  practice  is  simply 
the  survival  of  the  old-time  careless  Mexican  method,  little  if  any  improved  by  lapse 
of  time.  Given  an  unknown  quantity  of  water  in  a  ditch,  comprising  a  certain  num- 
ber of  "heads,"  one  "head"  to  serve  10  acres  for  twenty-four  hours  each  month; 
required,  the  pro  rata  to  be  delivered  to  3£  acres,  22  acres,  8£,  16,  1,120,  80,  27,  30, 
9  -  -  etc.,  acres,  respectively.  It  would  seem  that  the  solution  of  problems  as 
important  as  these  should  be  attacked  by  some  more  scientific  method  than  the 
guessing  ability  of  the  "zanjeros." 

The  foregoing  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  reflecting  upon  the  water  overseer's  force. 
Their  duties  are  performed  according  to  instructions  from  the  city  council.  The 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  345 

maintenance  of  this  inefficient  system  is  due  apparently  to  the  indifference  or  conserv- 
atism of  the  municipal  legislative  body,  and  perhaps  in  the  past  to  the  city's  desire 
to  monopolize  the  flow  of  the  river  in  order  to  prevent  the  possible  establishment  of 
adverse  rights.  In  the  latter  case  the  practice  has  proved  to  be  a  boomerang,  and, 
whatever  the  cau.se,  it  is  needlessly  wasteful.  For  some  years  the  river's  supply  has 
been  inadequate  to  meet  the  increasing  demand.  In  the  summer  of  this  year,  1900, 
the  third  consecutive  year  of  drought,  the  shortage  became  so  serious  that  the  city 
was  driven,  hurriedly  and  at  considerable  cost,  to  construct  three  pumping  plants 
with  a  view  to  augmenting  the  irrigation  supply  from  the  large  underflow  supposed 
to  exist  below  the  dry  bed  of  the  river,  but  these  are  stated  to  have  been  largely 
disappointing. 

Where  the  methods  of  measurement  are  so  primitive  it  is  natural  that  the 
irrigation  practice  should  be  correspondingly  crude.  It  is  so  in  and  about  Los 
Angeles  where  the  duty  of  water  is  very  low.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  by  a 
modern  system  of  measurement  and  apportionment  the  water  now  available  would 
be  found  capable  of  a  vastly  greater  duty,  the  income  from  the  sales  of  water  would 
be  increased,  pumping  could  be  dispensed  with,  and  the  necessity  of  largely  supple- 
menting the  .supply  would  be  postponed  some  years. 

The  West  Los  Angeles  Water  Company  is  elsewhere  mentioned  as  involved  in 
litigation  with  the  city  over  its  right  to  develop  on  its  own  land  percolating  waters, 
which,  presumably,  would  ultimately  reach  the  river  if  not  intercepted.  For  five 
years  past  this  company  has  taken  from  the  San  Fernando  Valley  a  quantity  of  water 
ranging  from  about  500  inches  to  about  one-half  that  amount,  which  it  has  sold  for 
irrigation  and  domestic  use  in  the  western  portion  of  the  city  and  in  the  fertile 
Cahuenga  Valley,  its  system  extending  to  the  Soldiers'  Home,  near  Santa  Monica.  In 
the  beginning  the  company  sold  acre  water  rights  equivalent  to  1  inch  of  water  to  10 
acres  of  land.  These  were  sold  for  $40  per  acre,  and  in  addition  an  annual  rental  of 
$8  per  acre,  payable  quarterly  was  provided  for.  After  225  of  these  acre  rights  had 
been  sold  the  company  discontinued  their  sale,  preferring  not  to  obligate  itself  in 
this  manner,  but  rather  to  reserve  its  supply  to  meet  the  rapidly  growing  demand  for 
domestic  service.  Its  present  method  of  selling  water  for  irrigation  is  termed  "gallon 
sales,"  and  is  at  the  rate  of  10  cents  per  thousand  gallons.  The  form  of  agreement 
covering  this  transaction  imposes  no  liability  upon  the  company;  it  provides  for  the 
sale  of  surplus  water  only,  and  does  not  secure  to  the  purchaser  the  right  to  the  same 
or  any  supply  of  water  in  the  future.  Where  water  is  sold  for  mixed  irrigation  and 
domestic  use,  there  is  a  minimum  rate  of  $1.50  per  month.  This  rate  entitles  the 
consumer  to  6,000  gallons;  any  excess  above  this  amount  is  charged  for  at  the  rate  of 
10  cents  per  thousand  gallons. 

The  rates  established  by  the  company  are  by  statute  subject  to  revision  by 
representatives  of  the  people.  Inside  the  city  limits  the  city  council  has  authority 
to  fix  rates,  and  outside  the  city  the  board  of  supervisors  of  the  county  has  this  power. 

This  company  considers  itself  the  absolute  owner  of  the  water  handled  by  it.  In 
this  respect  it  is  in  a  different  position  from  companies  dealing  with  natural  streams. 
If  its  contention  in  the  pending  litigation  with  the  city  is  correct,  viz,  that  its  supply 
is  developed  from  waters  percolating  in  the  soil — hence  a  part  of  the  soil — owned  by 
it,  there  is  no  doubt  that  under  the  existing  law  the  water  is  as  much  the  subject  of 


346  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

absolute  ownership  as  the  same  quantit3T  of  sand  or  clay  or  stone  taken  from  the 
same  land  would  be. 

Under  the  West  Los  Angeles  Water  Company's  system  water  is  carefully  meas- 
ured and  the  consumer  pays  according  to  the  amount  used.  Hence  there  is  an 
incentive  to  economy,  and  the  duty  of  water  will  be  found  to  be  much  greater  than 
under  the  city's  wasteful  system. 

It  may  be  remarked  in  closing  that  generally  throughout  southern  California  all 
water,  even  that  diverted  from  natural  surface  streams,  is  practically  regarded  as 
subject  to  absolute  ownership — that  is  to  say,  the  water  is  not  attached  to  the  land. 
It  may  be  bought,  sold,  or  rented  like  any  other  class  of  merchandise.  It  may  be 
owned  by  a  person  who  has  not  a  square  foot  of  land;  it  may  be  transferred  at  will 
from  one  tract  to  another,  etc.  In  fact,  the  only  apparent  difference  between  the 
present  accepted  title  to  water,  and  the  absolute  ownership  thereof  seems  to  be  that 
a  prescriptive  title  to  water  may  be  acquired  by  five  years'  adverse  use.  But  it  is 
hardly  necessary  to  add  that  at  the  present  time  no  water  will  be  found  running 
around  loose  in  southern  California  without  an  owner.  The  usual  trouble  is  that 
there  are  too  many  claimants. 

CONCLUSIONS. 

Having  noted  in  the  foregoing  pages  some  of  the  shortcomings  and  abuses  of  the 
existing  system  of  acquiring  and  administering  water  rights  in  this  vicinity,  it  may  be 
proper  to  add  some  suggestions  as  to  how  this  system  may  be  improved. 

When  we  remember  the  paramount  importance  of  irrigation  in  southern  Califor- 
nia, it  may  seem  strange  that  a  more  rational  and  systematic  plan  of  treatment  was 
not  adopted  long  ago.  That  it  was  not  is  due  probably  to  the  unfriendly  attitude 
shown  by  a  majority  in  the  State  legislature  toward  irrigation.  Until  quite  recent 
years  the  people  living  in  the  greater  part  of  the  State  regarded  irrigation  in  the 
same  light  that  eastern  people  generally  view  it,  viz,  that  it  is  a  grievous  hardship 
imposed  by  nature  upon  the  inhabitants  of  certain  ill-favored  regions  of  the  earth. 
Holding  this  opinion  it  was  the  custom  of  the  central  and  northern  counties  to  depre- 
ciate the  advantages  and  to  magnify  the  disadvantages  of  irrigation.  Through  their 
newspapers  and  by  all  other  means  of  publicity  they  sought  to  advertise  the  fact  that 
by  great  good  fortune  irrigation  was  unnecessary  in  their  respective  localities,  and 
they  endeavored  by  these  means  to  attract  immigration  to  themselves.  Those  sec- 
tions where  irrigation  was  properly  understood  were  always  represented  by  a 
minority  in  the  legislature.  Under  these  circumstances  it  is  not  surprising  that  the 
irrigation  interest  failed  to  secure  due  recognition  and  to  have  established  a  code  of 
laws  under  which  it  could  develop  in  a  safe  and  permanent  manner. 

At  no  time  in  the  past  has  a  thorough  study  of  existing  conditions  and  needs 
been  made.  Statutes  have  been  framed  without  full  knowledge  of  the  magnitude  of 
the  subject  and  its  economic  importance  to  the  State.  The  law  as  laid  down  by  deci- 
sions of  the  supreme  court  has  been  largely  in  the  nature  of  attempts  to  harmonize 
with  the  peculiar  conditions  of  the  arid  region  the  unsuitable  rules  of  the  common 
law  transplanted  from  lands  where  irrigation  is  unknown. 


WATER    RIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELKS    RIVER.  347 

PRESENT   WATER   LAW   DERIVED   FROM   MINING  LAW. 

The  law  governing  mining  claims  is  undoubtedly  the  parent  of  the  statutory 
procedure  for  the  establishment  of  a  water  right.  The  former  requires  the  posting 
of  a  notice  at  the  point  of  discovery  and  the  recording  of  a  copy  in  the  office  of  the 
recorder  of  the  mining  district;  the  latter  requires  the  posting  of  a  notice  at  the 
point  of  intended  diversion  and  the  recording  of  a  copy  in  the  office  of  the  county 
recorder.  Both  require  that  actual  work  upon  the  development  of  the  claim  shall 
be  commenced  within  a  specified  time,  but  here  the  similarity  ends,  and  the  subse- 
quent working  of  the  mining  law  is  far  more  effective  than  that  of  the  water  law. 
The  former  requires  a  definite  description  of  the  locality  affected  by  the  claim;  the 
latter  does  not.  There  may  be  many  mining  districts  in  a  county  thus  keeping  the 
records  near  the  locality  interested,  but  there  is  only  one  county  recorder's  office 
however  large  the  county  may  be.  The  mining  claimant  is  compelled  to  make  proof 
annually  of  the  amount  of  development  work  performed,  or  to  secure  title  by  patent, 
but  the  water  claimant  leaves  no  record 'as  to  how  much — if  anything  at  all — he  has 
done  toward  the  consummation  of  the  appropriation  set  forth  in  his  original  notice. 

IMPROVED   SYSTEM   OF   MAKING   APPROPRIATIONS   NEEDED. 

The  act  of  posting  a  notice  in  some  thicket  or  under  a  bowlder  in  some  obscure 
mountain  canyon  is  a  very  crude  way  of  beginning  so  important  a  work  as  an  appro- 
priation of  water,  nor  is  it  much  improved  by  sending  a  copy  to  the  county  recorder's 
office  to  go  on  record  among  many  thousands  of  similar  claims.  Under  a  rational 
irrigation  law  several  items  of  information  are  indispensable  before  initiating  a  new 
appropriation  of  water.  This  knowledge  should  be  supplied  to  the  intending  appro- 
priator  by  the  only  competent  authority — the  State.  The  principal  points  required 
are: 

(1)  What  prior  rights  exist  upon  the  available  sources  of  water;  their  nature 
and  extent. 

(2)  What  quantity  of  water  remains  subject  to  appropriation. 

(3)  What  quantity  the  claimant  will  be  permitted  to  take  for  the  intended  use. 

After  formal  notice  has  been  given  of  an  intention  to  take  a  portion  of  the  pub- 
lic water  supply  for  private  use,  the  public  should  have  the  right  to  supervise  the 
claimant's  actions  in  the  matter  and  to  hold  him  to  a  faithful  performance  of  the 
duties  and  obligations  assumed  by  him. 

All  agree  that  the  California  water  laws  now  in  force  are  seriously  deficient,  and 
that  they  must  be  reformed.  The  only  question  is  as  to  what  old  and  new  features 
are  desirable  to  be  embraced  in  the  new  law. 

In  the  opinion  of  the  writer  no  plan  yet  suggested  promises  results  at  all  com- 
parable with  those  which  would  be  derived  from  the  creation  of  a  scheme  of  State 
administration  following  the  general  lines  of  the  Wyoming  board  of  control.  That 
State  is  divided  into  four  water  divisions  bounded  by  natural  hydrographic  lines. 
Each  division  has  a  superintendent,  and  the  four  superintendents,  together  with  the 
State  engineer,  compose  the  board  of  control.  This  board  is  vested  with  authority  to 
adjudicate  existing  water  rights.  For  this  purpose  meetings  are  held  in  various  por- 
tions of  the  State  at  places  where  the  rights  under  examination  are  located.  The  State 


348  IRRIGATION    INVKSTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

engineer  measures  the  streams  and  ditches,  and  the  board  secures  an  intimate  knowl- 
edge of  the  facts  and  conditions  before  a  decision  is  rendered.  The  whole  procedure 
is  as  simple  and  effective  as  can  be  conceived,  and  it  produces  a  minimum  of  annoy- 
ance and  expense  to  those  concerned.  The  work  of  this  board  for  the  past  ten  years 
has  had  the  effect  of  practically  abolishing  the  exhaustive  litigation  over  water  rights 
which  is  so  common  in  other  States.  The  State  engineer  and  the  division  superin- 
tendents are  also  charged  with  the  duties  of  ascertaining  the  water  supply,  appor- 
tioning it  among  the  consumers  according  to  their  respective  rights,  issuing  permits 
for  new  appropriations,  keeping  complete  records  of  all  the  diversions  on  the  differ- 
ent streams  of  the  State,  etc.  The  plan  has  given  unqualified  satisfaction  to  the 
people  of  Wyoming,  and  it  promises  equal  success  in  California. 

WATER  RIGHTS  SHOULD  ATTACH  TO  THE  LAND. 

In  southern  California  it  has  been  the  general  practice  for  many  years  to  treat 
the  right  to  use  water  as  equivalent  to  the  absolute  ownership  of  the  water.  This 
view  is  not  affirmed  by  decisions  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  State.  On  the  contrary, 
the  attitude  of  the  court  is  adverse  to  the  principle  of  private  ownership  of  the  corpus 
of  the  water. 

The  propriety  of  having  all  water  rights  attached  to  the  land  itself  is  so  manifest 
that  it  seems  evident  that  the  reformed  code  of  irrigation  laws  for  this  State  will  con- 
tain a  declaration  to  this  effect. 

Doubtless  it  is  within  the  power  of  the  State  to  declare  that  existing  water  rights, 
as  well  as  those  hereafter  established,  must  be  appurtenant  to  the  land,  and  it  seems 
that  such  practice  will  be  just  and  equitable  to  all  concerned. 

WASTEFUL  PRACTICE  SHOULD  NOT  BE  PERMITTED. 

The  irrigation  practice  on  Los  Angeles  River  is  peculiar  in  many  respects,  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  whole  flow  of  the  river  is  claimed  by  the  city  of  Los  Angeles, 
but  it  is  like  that  of  all  other  localities  in  showing  the  necessity  for  intelligent  super- 
vision by  some  authority  other  than  that  of  the  principal  claimant.  Los  Angeles  is 
notoriously  prodigal  in  its  use  of  water  for  domestic  and  ordinary  municipal  pur- 
poses. Therefore  it  is  not  surprising  that  it  should  be  lavish  with  its  irrigation  supply. 

The  trait  of  human  nature  which  leads  the  average  purchaser  of  any  valuable 
commodity  to  get  all  that  he  can  for  his  money  finds  full  sway  in  the  city's  manage- 
ment of  the  water  supply.  There  is  no  incentive  to  economy.  Elsewhere  there  is  a 
general  recognition  of  the  principle  that  the  only  equitable  basis  for  water  rates, 
whether  for  irrigation  or  other  use,  is  to  charge  according  to  the  amount  of  water 
actually  taken  by  the  consumer.  Where  the  charge  for  irrigation  is  made  by  the 
acre  each  consumer  will  probably  take  all  that  he  can  get,  the  cost  being  the  same. 
Were  the  city  to  provide  a  modern  system  of  distribution  by  accurate  measurement, 
charging  according  to  the  quantity  taken,  a  decided  improvement  in  the  line  of 
economy  of  water,  with  corresponding  increase  of  area  served,  would  soon  result. 
An  officer  of  the  State  should  see  that  the  city,  and  those  who  receive  water  from 
the  city,  should  not  divert  from  the  river  a  greater  quantity  of  water  than  they  can 
use  in  a  reasonable  manner  for  beneficial  purpo.-cs. 

The  drought  which  has  prevailed  throughout  southern  California  for  the  past 


WATKR    BIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELES    RIVER.  349 

few  years  has  been  a  blessing  in  disguise  in  more  than  one  respect.  It  has  caused 
the  search  for  underground  water  which  has  been  so  notably  successful  in  many 
localities,  and,  still  more  important,  it  has  taught  to  thousands  of  irrigators  needed 
lessons  in  the  economical  use  of  water.  There  is  no  danger  of  anybody  using  too 
much  water  for  irrigation  when  he  has  to  pay  the  cost  of  raising  it  from  deep  wells. 
The  same  consideration  for  his  pocket  will  prevent  the  average  irrigator  from 
applying  too  much  water,  or  wasting  it  in  any  manner,  when  he  has  to  pay  in  strict 
proportion  to  the  amount  of  water  delivered  to  him. 

Notwithstanding  its  antiquity,  the  irrigation  practice  on  Los  Angeles  River,  like 
that  of  other  sections  of  the  State,  in  order  to  secure  the  best  possible  results  from 
its  water  supply  and  to  bring  forth  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number,  needs 
the  supervision  of  an  able  and  impartial  State  officer. 

RECOMMENDATIONS. 

(I)  A  board  of  water  control  should  be  created  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
existing  water  rights  and  supervising  the  acquisition  of  rights  in  the  future;  said 
board  to  consist  of  three  members,  all  of  them  irrigation  experts,  to  be  appointed 
by  the  supreme  court,  and  to  hold  office  during  good  behavior;  sessions  of  the  board 
for  the  adjudication  of  water  rights  to  be  held  as  near  as  practicable  to  the  respec- 
tive localities  affected.  Appeals  should  be  allowed  from  the  decisions  of  the  board 
to  the  supreme  court. 

(•2)  The  court  should  select  as  one  of  the  members  of  the  board  of  water  control 
an  able  hydraulic  engineer,  to  be  known  as  the  State  engineer,  and  who  shall  be  the 
executive  officer  of  the  board  in  the  administration  of  its  duties. 

(3)  Riparian  rights  should  be  made  subordinate  in  all  respects  to  rights  of 
appropriation. 

(i)  All  unappropriated  waters  should  be  declared  public  property,  the  statute 
providing  means  whereby  the  right  to  use  the  same  for  private  purposes  may  be 
acquired  by  appropriation;  such  right  to  become  attached  to  the  land  irrigated  or 
to  the  other  use  for  which  the  water  is  appropriated,  and  limited  to  the  actual  neces- 
sities of  such  use. 

(5)  There  should  be  cooperation  and  consultation  between  the  State  and  National 
governments  looking  to  the  fullest  possible  use  of  the  waters  of  the  State  for  irriga- 
tion, with  special  reference  to  the  Sacramento,  San  Joaquin,  and  Colorado  rivers. 

(6)  Definition  of  the  work  to  be  done  by  the  National  Government  as  distin- 
guished from  the  sphere  of  State  activity;  the  former  to  include  protection  and 
extension  of  the  forests,  the  investigation  of  better  methods  of  irrigation  now  being 
carried  on  by  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  the  hydrographic  surveys  of 
the  U.  S.  Geological  Survey,  and  the  storage  of  waters  for  public  lands. 

(7)  The  right  of  eminent  domain  should  be  extended  to  include  the  taking  of 
lands  or  rights  of  way  for  canals  and  other  works  necessary  for -the  development, 
conservation,  and  distribution  of  water,  and  the  taking  of  vested  water  rights  for  the 
superior  right  of  domestic  use,  whether  such  taking  be  for  public  or  private  benefit. 

(8)  The  board  of  water  control  should  be  vested  with  the  authority  to  fix  water 
rates  now  possessed  by  county  supervisors,  city  councils,  or  boards  of  trustees  of 
municipalities. 


350  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

(9)  The  supreme  court  of  California  .should  be  requested  to  appoint  an  expert 
nonparti.san  commission  to  frame  an  irrigation  law  suitable  to  the  needs  of  the  State 
and  embracing  the  principles  above  outlined. 

REMARKS   ON  THE   FOREGOING  RECOMMENDATIONS. 

The  provision  that  the  members  of  the  proposed  tribunal  be  appointed  by  the 
supreme  court  will  inspire  public  confidence  that  the}T  will  be  as  far  removed  from 
political  or  other  undesirable  influence  as  it  is  possible  to  have  them. 

A  statement  that  decisions  of  this  tribunal  shall  be  "final"  will  doubtless  arouse 
much  opposition.  The  right  of  appeal  should  be  preserved,  and  it  should  lie  direct 
to  the  supreme  court.  There  is  no  reason  wh}'  a  claim  adjudicated  by  this  tribunal 
should  be  subject  to  review  by  any  except  the  court  of  last  resort;  nor  should 
attorneys  be  admitted  to  practice  before  this  tribunal.  To  permit  these  things  is  to 
perpetuate 'the  present  system  of  endless  and  exhaustive  litigation. 

Owing  to  the  unfortunate  historj^  of  the  former  State  engineer's  department  and 
the  present  growing  hostility  to  the  continued  multiplication  of  bureaus,  commissions, 
etc.,  in  this  State,  strong  opposition  to  the  creation  of  this  organization  is  appre- 
hended. Nevertheless,  it  is  essential  to  the  plan  and  should  be  urged  strenuously. 

The  complete  subordination  of  riparian  to  appropriative  rights  will  probably 
secure  the  desired  end  as  well  as  the  abolition  of  the  former. 

It  would  seem  that  it  is  still  within  the  power  of  the  people  to  declare  that  an 
existing  water  right  should  become  attached  to  the  land  whereon  it  is  now  used.  If 
so,  this  should  be  done,  as  it  will  be  cumbersome  and  inconvenient  to  have  two 
general  classes  of  rights,  the  one  fixed  and  the  other  movable  at  will. 

Navigation  and  irrigation  along  the  rivers  of  arid  America  are  as  incompatible 
as  riparian  rights  and  rights  by  appropriation.  Speaking  generally,  there  is  far  more 
arable  land  in  the  arid  region  than  can  be  watered  from  anjr  source  whatever.  The 
greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number  of  people  will  be  secured  from  these  streams 
when  their  navigation  is  rendered  impossible  by  reason  of  the  consumption  of  water 
by  irrigation.  The  amount  of  water  required  to  maintain  navigation,  even  in  a  canal 
or  canalized  river,  is  enormous,  and  the  benefit  derived  by  the  public  from  its  use  in 
this  manner  is  vastly  less  than  would  follow  from  its  use  for  irrigation.  There  is  no 
"divine  right"  of  navigation.  The  fact  that  this  industry  has  long  enjoyed  special 
privileges  and  the  paternal  care  of  governments  to  whom  irrigation  is  unknown  is  no 
reason  why  it  should  continue  to  be  so  nurtured  in  a  region  where  the  waters  of  rivers 
are  needed  for  a  more  beneficial  purpose.  There  is  probably  no  river  navigation 
which  does  not  constantly,  or  at  least  frequently,  require  liberal  State  or  national 
aid  in  order  to  maintain  its  existence.  Withdraw  this  artificial  stimulus  and  rapid 
decline  will  follow.  Were  notice  to  be  given  now  to  the  inland  navigation  interests 
of  California  that  henceforth  no  further  financial  aid  will  be  given  them,  but  that,  on 
the  contrary,  it  will  be  the  policy  of  State  and  nation  to  encourage  to  the  fullest  extent 
the  use  of  such  streams  for  irrigation,  such  action  would  prevent  further  expansion 
of  navigation  and  make  it  feasible  to  purchase  or  condemn  existing  rights  whenever 
such  a  course  may  be  found  desirable.  To  attempt  the  maintenance  of  navigation 
on  any' stream  in  arid  America  by  means  of  impounded  water  would  be  a  waste  well- 
nigh  criminal.  The  use  of  waste  and  seepage  waters  for  this  purpose  is  a  very  dif- 


WATKR    BIGHTS    ON    LOS    ANGELKS    RIVER.  351 

ferent  matter.  Possibly  .such  a  plan  may  be  practicable  on  the  Sacramento  and  San 
Joaquin  rivers,  but  where  the  water  of  a  navigable  river  can  be  consumed  in  irriga- 
tion it  will  be  far  more  profitable  to  the  State  and  nation  to  so  use  it,  even  if  the 
benefits  derived  by  the  people  from  inland  navigation  had  to  be  preserved  by  the 
substitution  of  a  State  railway  for  the  waterway. 

I  have  found  difficulty  in  deciding  whether  the  Wyoming  plan  of  board  of 
control  might  not  be  applicable  to  our  conditions,  but  in  view  of  the  large  number 
of  water  claims  now  existing  and  which  would  require  early  adjudication,  I  have 
concluded  that  a  somewhat  different  organization  is  desirable. 


PROBLEMS  OF  WATER  STORAGE  ON  TORRENTIAL  STREAMS  OF  SOUTHERN 
CALIFORNIA  AS  TYPIFIED  BY  SWliliTWATER  AND  SAN  JACINTO  RIVERS. 

By  JAMES  D.  SCIIDYLER, 
Hydraulic  Engineer. 

INTRODUCTION. 

Sweetwater  and  San  Jacinto  rivei's  have  been  selected  for  the  study  of  water- 
right  conditions  and  general  storage  and  irrigation  problems,  because  on  each  of  these 
streams  substantial  masonry  dams  have  been  erected,  and  the  storage  of  water  and 
its  distribution  for  irrigation  and  general  domestic  service  have  been  established  for 
a  period  sufficiently  long  to  afford  valuable  experience  and  precedents.  The  writer 
has  been  selected  to  make  a  study  and  presentation  of  these  problems  and  experiences, 
presumably  because  he  was  the  engineer  who  designed  and  built  the  dams  on  both 
streams. 

Aside  from  the  Bear  Valley  Dam  on  the  headwaters  of  Santa  Ana  River  and  the 
Cuyamaca  Dam  on  the  headwaters  of  San  Diego  River,  the  Sweetwater  and  He  met 
dams  are  the  only  completed  structures  in  southern  California  that  impound,  utilize, 
divert,  and  distribute  water  from  torrential  streams.  A  number  of  other  dams  have 
been  projected,  and  several  have  been  partially  or  wholly  completed,  but  are  not  as 
yet  in  service. 

There  is  a  peculiar  interest  attached  to  the  storage  reservoir  and  distributing 
system  which  derives  its  supply  from  a  torrential  stream,  as  it  is  a  creation  of 
something  of  permanent  value  out  of  that  which  would  not  only  be  otherwise  wasted 
and  lost,  but  would  frequently  cause  havoc  and  destruction  to  property  in  the  act  of 
going  to  waste.  As  its  name  implies,  the  torrential  stream  is  one  of  violent  force 
and  action  during  certainJntermittent  periods  of  its  career,  and  its  power  and  capacity 
for  destruction  everywhere  need  to  be  curbed.  Not  the  least  useful  of  the  functions 
of  the  impounding  reservoir,  therefore,  is  that  of  lessening  the  destructive  force  of 
the  torrent  upon  which  it  is  situated.  It  is  doubtful,  however,  if  such  substantial 
and  costly  works  as  are  needed  for  effecting  this  purpose  would  be  undertaken  by 
any  community  for  that  object  alone,  and  unless  the  water  impounded  can  be  put  to 
use,  and  either  harnessed  for  power  or  consumed  in  irrigation,  or  both,  and  is 
obtainable  free  from  legal  complications  or  harassing  restrictions,  the  incentive  will 
always  be  lacking  for  the  construction  of  such  permanent  dams,  either  by  individuals, 
private  corporations,  or  municipalities.  Every  possible  encouragement  needs  to  be 
afforded  for  such  enterprises  in  the  way  of  smoothing  the  legal  paths;  and  the  purpose 
of  this  inquiry,  as  I  understand  it,  is  to  ascertain  what  the  experience  of  years  in  the 
actual  impounding  and  use  of  water  on  these  streams  has  been,  physically  and  legally, 
and  what  modifications  of  the  laws  appear  to  be  desirable  in  the  light  of  these 

23856— No.  100—01 23  353 


354  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

experiences,  in  order  that  it  may  become  easier  to  utilize  the  public  streams  and  the 
water  going  to  waste.  The  obstacles  which  nature  places  in  the  way  of  executing 
such  works  are  quite  sufficient  without  having  to  overcome  legal  barriers  and 
restrictions  of  a  burdensome  nature.  These  natural  obstacles  are  such  as  to  restrict 
the  number  of  enterprises  which  are  practicable  from  an  engineering  standpoint  to  a 
very  few,  and  consist  chiefly  in  a  lack  of  a  satisfactory  combination  of  conditions 
essential  to  success.  These  requisite  conditions  are,  briefly  stated: 

First.  A  dam  site,  preferably  in  a  narrow  gorge,  whose  foundations  are  suitable 
for  the  erection  of  any  height  of  dam  required,  of  any  type  that  may  be  selected. 

Second.  A  capacious  valley  above  the  dam  site,  with  little  fall  or  grade,  and 
affording  a  reservoir  site  of  capacity  commensurate  with  the  size  of  the  stream,  with 
a  reasonable  height  of  dam. 

Third.  An  area  of  arable  lands  and  a  resident  population  requiring  water  suffi- 
ciently extensive  to  consume  all  that  may  be  stored  in  the  reservoir,  and  capable  of 
producing  crops  of  a  character  and  value  which  will  admit  of  the  payment  of  water 
rates  demanded;  these  lands  being  below  the  elevation  of  the  dam,  in  its  near  vicinity, 
and  readily  commanded  by  the  stored  water  through  gravity  conduits. 

Fourth.  A  watershed  above  the  reservoir  of  sufficient  area  to  afford  adequate 
run  off  from  the  normal  rainfall  to  fill  the  reservoir  periodically  with  certainty. 

Fifth.  A  fairly  reliable  average  rainfall. 

It  will  be  seen  at  a  glance,  with  a  moment's  reflection,  that  the  conjunction  of  all 
these  conditions,  each  of  a  favorable  nature,  must  necessarily  be  rare.  The  great 
majority  of  the  mountain  gulches,  canyons,  and  torrents,  though  abounding  in  dam 
sites,  have  no  reservoir  sites,  except  perhaps  so  near  the  crest  of  the  mountains  as  to 
afford  but  limited  water  supply  to  them. 

For  these  reasons  it  becomes  all  the  more  essential  that  there  be  no  friction 
between  such  enterprises  as  are  feasible  and  the  laws  of  the  land  which  control  them. 

SWEETWATER  RIVER. 
PHYSICAL  CHARACTERISTICS. 

Sweetwater  River  heads  in  the  Cuyamaca  Mountains  northeast  of  San  Diego,  at 
an  elevation  of  about  6,000  feet,  and  empties  into  the  Bay  of  San  Diego  but  7  miles 
north  of  the  Mexican  boundary  (PI.  XXVIII).  Its  extreme  air-line  length  is  41 
miles,  and  the  total  area  of  its  watershed  above  its  mouth  is  216  square  miles.  The 
watershed  is  a  comparatively  narrow  trough,  2  to  8  miles  wide  from  crest  to  crest, 
and  over  a  portion  of  its  length  the  stream  occupies  a  rocky  gorge  that  is  almost 
impassable;  in  fact,  there  occurs  a  succession  of  these  gorges  from  half  a  mile  to  5 
miles  in  length  all  the  way  down  the  stream.  The  lowest  of  .these  is  7  miles  above  the 
mouth  of  the  stream,  and  here  is  located  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  a  masonry  structure 
which  has  become  quite  universally  known  (PI.  XXIX).  The  reservoir  above  the 
dam  is  3.5  miles  in  length,  and  occupies  the  whole  of  a  valley  lying  between  this  lower 
gorge  and  the  one  next  above.  Both  of  the  lower  gorges  are  cut  through  the  groat 
porphyry  dike  which  traverses  the  whole  of  San  Diego  County  parallel  with  the 
coast,  immediately  above  which  and  in  contact  is  granite  extending  back  to  the  crest 
of  the  range  and  beyond.  The  site  of  the  dam  was  extremely  favorable  for  the 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATEB    AND    SAN    JAC1NTO    RIVERS.  355 

construction  of  a  safe  masonry  wall,  and  its  only  drawback  is  its  low  elevation,  the 
crest  of  the  dam  being  but  215  feet  above  sea  level,  and  its  lowest  outlet  140  feet. 
The  mesa  lands  along  the  coast,  which  are  the  most  desirable  for  residence  and 
cultivation,  on  account  of  their  freedom  from  frost,  reach  above  these  elevations, 
and  there  has  been  difficulty  in  supplying  many  of  those  needing  water.  The  water- 
shed area  above  the  dam  is  186  square  miles.  This  area  has  been  classified  by  Mr. 
J.  B.  Lippincott,  in  Bulletin  No.  140  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey  for 
1895,  as  follows: 

Square  miles. 

Steep  and  rocky  mountains,  favorable  to  large  run  off 26 

Lower  rolling  mountains,  usually  covered  with  brush 99 

Rolling  hills,  covered  with  soil  and  disintegrated  granite 30 

Agricultural  lands  and  river  bottom  (17  per  cent) 3^ 

Total 186 

The  same  authority  estimates  the  mean  elevation  of  the  watershed  at  2,200  feet, 
and  says,  regarding  its  topography: 

The  most  noticeable  feature  of  this  basin  influencing  the  run  off  is  the  abrupt  flattening  of  the 
slopes  at  the  base  of  the  mountains  into  agricultural  fields.  The  drainage  lines,  deeply  cut  into  the 
steep  hillsides,  are  quickly  lost  or  are  poorly  defined  in  crossing  the  flat  alluvial  cones  or  partly  filled 
valleys  on  the  low  grounds.  In  turn,  the  nearly  level  fields  or  parks  drain  into  deep  canyona  The 
occasional  flood,  caused  by  a  heavy  rain  rushing  down  the  mountain  side,  spreads  out  over  the  flat 
lands,  much  of  it  disappearing  before  it  can  reach  the  lower  canyon.  The  steady  percolation  which 
might  be  expected  at  points  below  is,  to  a  large  extent,  cut  off  by  the  high  rate  of  evaporation,  and 
thus  the  percentage  of  run  off,  taking  the  basin  as  a  whole,  is  small. 

This  watershed  area  in  a  region  less  arid  would  be  considered  a  sufficient  one  to 
afford  a  reliable  supply  for  a  reservoir  of  even  greater  capacity  than  the  one  now 
back  of  the  dam.  The  extreme  irregularity  of  the  run  off  is  shown  by  the  following 
table,  made  up  from  measurements  taken  during  the  entire  period  since  the  completion 

of  the  dam: 

Run  off  of  the  Sweetwater  watershed. 


Season. 

Rainfall 
at  Sweet- 
water  Dam. 

Run  off  as 
measured 
at  the 
dam. 

Average 
yearly  run 
off  per 
square 
mile. 

Total  aver- 
age annual 
run  off. 

1887-88  

Inches. 

Acre-feet. 
7,048 

Oil.  ft.  per 
sec. 

0.0524 

Cu.ft.per 
sec. 

9.74 

1888-89                                    '                       

13.53 

25,253 

.1875 

34.88 

1889-90                               

16.52 

20,532 

.1525 

28.36 

1890-91                                                                  

12.65 

21,565.5 

.1602 

29.79 

1891  9''                                  

9.88 

6,198.3 

.0460 

8.26 

1892  93                                                                   

11.62 

16,260.7 

.1210 

22.51 

1893-94                                             

6.20 

1,338.4 

.0099 

18.45 

1894  95                                                                         

16.19 

73,412.1 

.5452 

101.40 

1895-96                                                

7.29 

1,320.9 

.0098 

1.83 

1896-97                                                                         

10.97 

6,891.6 

.0512 

9.52 

7.05 

4.3 

1898-99                                                          

'5.05 

245.5 

.0018 

.34 

0 

.0000 

180,070.3 

13,851.5 

20.39 

356  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

The  entire  volume  of  water  which  has  readied  the  dam  in  the  thirteen  years 
since  it  was  built  would  cover  180,070  acres  1  foot  deep,  and  if  spread  over  the  water- 
shed would  cover  it  a  little  less  than  18  inches  deep,  or  an  average  of  1.36  inches  in 
depth  per  annum.  During  the  first  eight  years  of  storage  the  run  off  was  abundant 
and  even  excessive,  the  total  volume  amounting  to  171,608  acre-feet,  of  which  43.5 
per  cent  was  in  one  year,  1895.  The  succeeding  five  years  to  date  have  produced 
but  8,462  acre-feet  of  run  off  in  all,  or  only  35  per  cent  of  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir. 
The  average  of  the  thirteen  years,  if  it  could  have  been  evenly  distributed,  would 
have  given  a  yearly  volume  of  13,851  a«re-feet,  equivalent  to  a  constant  stream  of 
20.39  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  water  supply  being  so  unevenly  divided  among  the 
seasons,  there  has  resulted  a  very  great  waste,  which  has  amounted  to  approximately 
80,000  acre-feet  in  all,  or  43  per  cent  of  the  whole.  Of  this  amount  the  greater  portion 
was  lost  during  the  great  flood  of  January,  1895,  when  nearly  three  reservoirfuls  of 
water  poured  over  the  dam  in  a  few  days.  This  loss  is  entirely  distinct  from  the 
constant  unavoidable  loss  due  to  evaporation.  The  waste  or  loss  over  the  crest  of 
the  dam  may  be  classified  as  avoidable,  because  it  is  due  solely  to  the  lack  of  reser- 
voirs of  sufficient  capacity.  Had  there  been  in  existence,  at  the  time  of  the  flood  of 
1895,  three  additional  reservoirs  of  equal  capacity  to  that  back  of  the  Sweetwater 
Dam  not  a  drop  of  water  need  have  wasted  into  the  sea  during  that  flood,  and  the  last 
three  years  since  1897  would  have  been  years  of  plenty  instead  of  seasons  of  drought 
and  shortage.  Two,  and  possibly  three,  such  auxiliary  sites  exist  on  the  stream 
and  might  be  made  available.  One  lesson  to  be  drawn,  therefore,  from  the  extreme 
fluctuations  of  this  stream,  if  it  can  be  regarded  as  a  type  for  southern  California,  is 
that  all  possible  reservoir  sites  upon  it  need  to  be  utilized  and  a  great  excess  of  res- 
ervoir capacity  provided  if  its  waters  are  all  to  be  utilized  and  the  industries  which 
spring  up  under  established  irrigation  S3rstems  are  to  be  properly  safeguarded. 

THE  DUTY  OF  THE  STREAM. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  problems  in  connection  with  the  utilization  of  every 
stream  is  the  determination  of  the  probable  maximum  duty  to  be  expected  from  that 
stream  when  its  waters  shall  have  been  conserved  to  the  fullest  extent  practicable. 
The  solution  of  this  problem  should  be  the  work  of  the  United  States  Government, 
for  it  is  one  of  national  importance,  and  too  large  for  any  lesser  organization  to 
attempt.  If  it  be  determined  within  reasonable  limits  of  accuracy,  in  advance  of  the 
construction  of  storage  works,  much  ill-advised  investment  of  capital  can  be  saved, 
and  the  development  of  the  water  supply  may  be  made  with  a  greater  certainty  as  to 
the  results  to  be  achieved.  A  stream  which  may  have  been  generally  regarded  as  a 
reliable  supply  for  irrigating  50,000  acres,  for  example,  might  prove,  on  thorough 
investigation,  to  be  good  for  only  10,000  acres.  If  the  discovery  of  its  real  duty  is 
made  before  the  distributing  system  is  built  over  an  extravagantly  large  area,  and 
before  water  is  pledged  to  more  lands  than  can  possibly  be  supplied,  much  complication 
will  be  avoided  and  much  waste  of  money  prevented.  For  lack  of  this  sort  of 
information,  which  it  is  the  function  of  the  Government  to  gather  and  tabulate  for 
general  use,  many  ill-advised  schemes  have  been  projected  throughout  the  United 
States,  and  more  are  being  projected  every  year,  which  would  be  condemned,  wholly 


U.  S.  Dept    of  Agr  ,  Bui.  100,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


PLATE  XXIX. 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JACTNTO    RIVERS. 


357 


or  in  part,  if  their  true  value  were  outlined  by  such  preliminary  studies.  For  this 
reason  the  experience  of  the  Sweetwater  system  is  of  value  as  a  precedent. 

The  supply  of  water  required  in  irrigation  on  the  system  has  been  assumed  to  be 
about  1  acre-foot  per  acre  per  annum,  or  what  is  equivalent  to  12  inches  of  rainfall, 
and  this  is  the  volume  apportioned  by  the  company  as  the  annual  allowance  granted 
in  their  water-right  contracts.  The  actual  use,  including  the  consumption  for 
domestic  supply  to  the  inhabitants  of  National  City  and  Chula  Vista,  has  averaged 
about  1.5  acre-feet  per  acre.  A  rough  check  on  this  estimate,  which  has  been  arrived 
at  from  independent  observation  and  data,  is  obtained  in  the  following  manner:  The 
total  run  off  in  thirteen  years  was  180,070  acre-feet,  all  of  which  was  used  in  twelve 
years;  the  total  amount  passing  over  the  top  of  the  dam  as  waste  during  this  period  was 
approximately  80,070  acre-feet,  leaving  for  utilization  and  to  supply  evaporation, 
100,000  acre-feet.  This  100,000  acre-feet  was  equivalent  to  a  mean  of  8,333  acre-feet 
per  annum  over  the  twelve-year  period.  Taking  this  volume  as  the  assumed  mean 
contents  of  the  dam,  the  mean  area  of  surface  exposed  to  evaporation  was  436  acres. 
As  the  evaporation  loss  was  measured  for  several  years  its  mean  was  ascertained  to  be 
about  4. 5  feet  in  depth  per  annum;  and  this  depth  in  twelve  years  would  have  amounted 
to  23,544  acre-feet,  or  23.5  per  cent  of  the  total  salvage  from  the  flow  of  the  stream. 
The  remaining  76,454  acre-feet  would  represent  the  volume  actually  consumed  in 
irrigation,  after  deducting  domestic  service  and  leakages. 

As  a  check  upon  this  computation  of  the  total  loss  by  evaporation  I  have  taken 
the  weekly  record  of  gage  heights  kept  without  interruption  from  April  30,  1888,  to 
January  1,  1898,  kindly  furnished  by  Mr.  Savage;  and  from  the  table  of  areas  and 
contents  of  the  reservoir  at  different  levels  I  have  placed  opposite  each  weekly  gage 
reading  the  corresponding  area  of  reservoir  surface  exposed  to  evaporation.  The 
sum  of  these  areas  divided  by  the  number  taken  each  year  gives  the  yearly  mean 
area  of  surface  exposure.  From  this  data  I  have  made  the  following  interesting  table: 

Reservoir  surface  exposed  to  evaporation,  1889-1897. 


Year. 

Maximum. 

Minimum. 

Mean. 

Remarks. 

1889                                

Acres. 
424 

Acres. 
342 

Acres. 
372 

After  April  30. 

1889                                                                  

713 

110 

500 

Emptied  by  order  of  court 

1890                                              

183 

102 

140 

1891                                                                

642 

145 

503 

1892                                       

607 

446 

511 

1893                                                                  

711 

443 

583 

1894                                                  

649 

331 

448 

1895                                                                       

829 

333 

600 

Dam  overtopped  by  flood. 

1896                                                  

469 

224 

338 

1897  

458 

206 

316 

431 

This  figure  of  mean  surface  exposure  closely  corresponds  with  that  derived  by  a 
totally  distinct  method  and  affords  a  gratifying  check  upon  the  computation,  although 
a  more  accurate  and  more  laborious  process  of  reaching  the  result  would  be  to 
multiply  the  measured  evaporation  each  week  by  the  area  corresponding  and  sum  up 
the  total  instead  of  taking  a  mean  evaporation  loss  for  a  period  of  years. 


358  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Assuming  an  average  consumption  of  50  gallons  per  capita  in  supplying  domestic 
demand,  and  estimating  the  population  as  2,500  inhabitants,  the  volume  thus  repre- 
sented would  be  equivalent  to  1,600  acre-feet  in  twelve  years.  This  quantity  being 
deducted  from  76,454,  and  the  remainder  divided  by  12,  the  quotient  is  6,230  acre- 
feet  as  the  average  volume  of  water  applied  to  the  lands  annually  during  the  twelve 
years.  The  area  irrigated  in  1896  reached  a  maximum  of  4,580  acres,  if  a  mean 
area  of  4,000  acres  be  assumed  as  having  been  irrigated,  the  mean  depth  of  water 
applied,  by  the  above  computation,  would  be  1.56  feet.  This  is,  of  course,  a  very 
rough  approximation  of  the  probable  consumption  during  the  period  in  question. 
It  is  closely  corroborated  by  numerous  meter  measurements  of  the  volume  applied 
to  certain  known  areas,  so  that  the  actual  use  may  be  fairly  closely  stated  to  have 
been  1.5  feet  in  depth  per  annum. 

There  has  been  a  growing  conviction,  however,  that  the  orchards  would  have 
thrived  equally  well,  and  perhaps  better,  with  a  more  moderate  application  of  water. 
The  experience  gained  in  the  care  of  bearing  orchards  since  the  great  drought  com- 
pelled the  company  to  seek  and  develop  an  independent  source  of  supply  have  shown 
that  the  trees  will  live  and  bear  with  an  extremely  small  allowance  of  water.  The 
history  of  the  use  of  water  in  1899  is  extremely  interesting.  At  the  beginning  of 
the  irrigation  season  the  reservoir  contained  barely  40,000,000  gallons  of  water.  By 
the  sinking  of  numerous  wells  in  the  upper  part  of  the  reservoir  valley  and  in  the 
valley  below  the  dam,  and  by  the  establishment  of  elaborate  pumping  plants,  the 
company  developed  and  pumped  457,000,000  gallons,  of  which  they  estimated 
140,000,000  gallons  were  used  in  supplying  domestic  service  and  for  mechanical 
purposes,  leaving  317,000,000  gallons  as  the  amount  of  pumped  water  used  in  irri- 
gating 3,800  acres  of  orchard,  chiefly  citrus  fruits.  This,  added  to  the  40,000,000 
gallons  in  the  reservoir,  gave  a  total  volume  of  supply  of  1,096  acre-feet.  Thus  the 
average  depth  of  water  applied  was  but  0.288  feet,  or  3.375  inches.  The  irrigation 
was  supplemented  by  thorough  cultivation,  and  the  orchards,  when  thus  cared  for, 
were  quite  thrifty  and  bore  heavily.  In  fact,  the  lemon  crop  was  never  so  heavy  as 
the  one  following  the  drought  of  1899.  The  water  used  was  but  18.5  per  cent  of  the 
average  amount  previously,  applied.  Still  it  can  not  be  argued  from  this  experience 
that  such  extreme  economy  could  be  practiced  as  a  regular  thing.  It  appears  to  be 
the  general  opinion  now  among  the  irrigators  that  they  have  heretofore  used  more 
water  than  necessary,  and  that  the  allotment  of  1  acre-foot  per  annum  (326,000  gallons 
per  acre,  or  12  inches  in  depth)  is  ample  for  their  orchards  and  all  other  crops,  except 
alfalfa,  which  requires  rather  more.  This  being  accepted  as  a  reasonable  allowance, 
the  maximum  possible  duty  of  Sweetwater  River  in  irrigation,  based  on  the  measured 
run  off  of  thirteen  years,  may  be  deduced  as  follows,  assuming  that  ample  storage 
capacity  be  provided:  The  average  annual  run  off  is  13,492  acre-feet,  of  which  the  loss 
by  evaporation  from  the  surface  of  reservoirs  may  be  25  per  cent.  This  would  leave 
10,119  acre-feet  as  the  average  volume  available  for  actual  irrigation,  which  would 
irrigate  10,119  acres. 

In  short  had  there  been  more  reservoirs  on  the  Sweetwater,  having  a  combined 
storage  capacity  of  75,000  acre-feet  (instead  of  18,000  before  the  flow  of  1895  and 
22,500  since  the  following  year),  the  stream  flow  since  1887  would  have  amply  irri- 
gated about  10,000  acres  of  land  chiefly  in  orchard  without  the  panicky  conditions 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JAOINTO    RIVERS.  359 

resulting  from  successive  droughts.  But  with  conditions  as  existing  to-day,  having 
:i  reservoir  of  but  22,500  acre-feet  capacity,  the  safe  duty  of  the  stream  is  probably 
less  than  3,000  acres,  without  having  to  resort  to  pumping  an  auxiliary  supply  during 
dry  seasons. 

To  provide  for  the  contingencies  of  drought  and  losses  by  evaporation  in  streams 
of  this  class,  judging  solely  from  the  record  of  thirteen  years,  it  would  appear  to  be 
essential  to  provide  7.5  acre-feet  of  storage  capacity  for  each  acre  desired  to  be  irri- 
•gatecl.  Having  such  storage  provided,  the  area  which  may  be  irrigated  from  the 
catchment  of  a  given  watershed  is  approximately  one-twelfth  of  the  area  of  the  water- 
shed. These  deductions  may  be  modified  with  further  experience,  and  would  only 
apply  to  similar  conditions  of  soil,  climate,  and  character  of  run  off. 

Sweetwater  River  is  essentially  a  stream  for  storage  utilization  only.  It  has 
practically  no  living  water,  except  at  its  extreme  sources  and  for  10  or  20  miles  down 
from  the  summit  of  the  range.  From  June  to  the  following  November  or  December 
there  is  rarely  any  flow  into  the  Sweetwater  Reservoir.  For  this  reason  there  have 
been  practically  no  attempts  to  utilize  the  normal  summer  flow  for  irrigation,  except 
in  a  very  small  way. 

CLAIMS  TO  THE  WATER  OF  SWEETWATER  RIVER. 

The  uncertain  character  of  the  stream  can  very  well  be  judged  by  an  inspection  of 
the  records  of  water  claims  filed  in  the  county  recorder's  office  at  San  Diego.  The 
following  table  gives  an  abstract  of  all  the  claims  of  record  on  the  stream,  giving  the 
essential  points  of  each  claim: 


360 


IRRIOATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 


of  d 


I         g 

3        _      S 


. 
•ass     SI 


5      £      -S 


A 
8 


a      5  «  £• 


ft  fe  S.  S  §.  £ 

ft  -§  'a  S  "ft  o 


-Q~  -3    .0"  "3    ^3*  -S 

9  « 11  ~  $  « 


«  ° 

S     p, 

c    ft 


II 


a 

5 


!! 


g  c  S 

^f    O    'p. 


o 

3 


a 

! . ' 

u  «  , 

oil 

ifj 

•^      M     <M 


Si 


III 


s§ 

"E    o 

3    -C 


» 1 


o  ^ 

'i  & 
S  = 


3  a 

c  | 


H 

s 


•o 
•8 
S 


•o     r 

O     02 


rt-    s 

a     . 

\    R" 


1  to  S  .2  <n 


if 


S 

0) 

5 
^ 
B 


w   °  w   °  w  -i.  | 

eo   ***  eo    "•"  co   y   i 
BD         .  US          3 


ft  S 
"3  B! 


« 
I 


•s 

H 
"S. 


E 

A 


|  g  |  g 
1  I  i  i 

a    ft   fl    ft 

a  j.,  a  JH 
S  S  s  § 
•S5-S  3 

.3  *  .S  « 


I  2 


I! 

05       a«l§          £ 


« 


in 
a 


3 

'"5 


W 

td 


&    0 


H 

a 


1-2       S 

Is  A 

a   *    o   O 


m 


i 

S-. 


o.  e 
g 


w  g  3 
&^ 


3     S 


sf 

>> 

3 


-•      8 

bi         *< 


a     s 


WATER  STORAGE  ON  SWKETWATER  AND  SAN  JACINTO  RIVERS. 


861 


1 


Is     * 

f|       ^ 

i  <H      ,= 

»         s 

,-i      1     1-  ! 

!             I!   j 

IE          8          p 

•S  .a   c 

-j    ~J    'E 

'III 

s 

>.                     >N      ~ 

U                     «      g 

al     * 

a                            1*1* 

!    i    fill 

s        a        S  .      2 

*o 

h 

I- 

•          -a 

*| 

i   u 

a-c 

M 

•          ? 

11 

c5"  *J 

11 

a"  S 

.2  a 

:          xi  o 

gj      -W 

'->    " 

'       ~  Si  ^ 

s  2  e 

S  a 

l« 

:          §l 

*             ,n  " 

O      r]      i^ 

^j 

t  i 

1 

fl 

1       £a-    I 

1       II    5 
E      3&    ^ 

^ 

-  1  S> 

2,     3    'C 

ill' 

I  "  a 

s             s"            c"  'S   S   c 

!      1      11!^ 

!     !     I11! 

o"  1     • 

«  '3  P 

15s 

o  85 

i                 j 

x 
:                    *• 
i                    t- 

1"    P  !l!i 

•s 

li    ? 

.  i        j..i 

S  'o       §  .5 
^  '7        '3   i! 
-^         55J 

'                   5 
• 

!  J3                         |J    5           "0     .      S     t 

•1       1 

CO                   j 

d     •                   S           S 

CC                                            - 

-  S      a  9 

=  a 

0)     ft 


*H         ^ 

o   a 


5   S   S         H   m 
X 


:!  I 

o        1 

£  X 


«   o  « 


w 
$3 


S  " 


the 
ich 


£   S 


|ggS 
•a  g  ^  H 

t,      •    *    C 


der  a  4-inch  pressu 
water  flowing  and 
shall  hereafter  flo 


2   o   o 

d   ™    o 

SB- 
01 

1-1        DO 


l 
w 


$  3  M 

C        ti      rH 
«      ^      -J 


1 

a 


1 

2 
d 
£ 


S 

« 


It.  M 


les  El 


c 
o 

s 


la 

e 


eo.  D.  C 
Diego  F 


II 
T3    *O 

i  5 
•g  o 


s 


55 


a     s 


3(52 


IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN    CALIFORNIA.. 


I 


1 

3 
1 
1 

• 

g 

« 

g 

[ 

1 

5, 

I 

a" 

V 

s"       : 

s 

•3 

a 

t 

•o 

\ 

00 

of 

i 

§ 

&  » 

y  4> 

s  2" 

o,  s, 

•  » 

o      • 

-  - 
3  a  , 

;     , 

5 

?  1     • 

j  9  * 

-i               k 

1 

j 

a 

I           ^ 

< 
T 

< 

T: 

0 

~£  ^      1 
c   a        c 

i       .£ 

E 

!     s 

i 

O     at            c 

>             C 

i 

g 

>    1 

i 
j 

•g 

!s  •§       !? 

e 

-    1 

> 

0> 

i-T  '^.         c< 

r  °*  <? 

>         c 

•3 

M    fl         t- 

§•  o       t 

*-  if 

§    c 

5            •*• 

3         a 

"3 

!D            i 

M    g 

J              0 

a 

£ 

8  "§      "^ 

•§« 

•    g   -> 

•3T  j 

^    tf 

w  "* 

•    0. 

»          S 

65  s 

» 

,nt  claimed. 

»•  •§       , 
|l      I 

S     «           _C 

! 

1    «     »    1 
§    llf 

c 
T: 

c 
•c 

I 

I 

1 

| 

*s 

I 

o 

I 

5    .      * 

O   Q 

JS 

< 

s 

1 

& 

( 

« 

c 

1 

o 
*?: 

s       s 

g 

« 

WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  363 

Reviewing  this  tabulation  of  recorded  claims,  the  following  comments  and  notes 
as  to  the  purpose  and  status  of  the  claims,  so  far  as  known,  will  be  pertinent:  The 
first  seven  tilings  in  the  table,  made  between  June  and  October,  1885,  were  all  posted 
at  practically  the  same  place,  some  6  miles  east  of  Alpine  and  4  to  5  miles  southwest 
of  Dcscanso.  in  the  rocky  gorge  of  Sweetwater  River,  at  an  elevation  of  about  3,000 
feet  above  sea  level,  and  were  evidently  made  in  the  interest  of  a  project  for  supplying 
the  city 'of  San  Diego  with  water.  This  project  never  passed  the  promoter  stage  and 
the  claims  are  manifestly  invalid. 

Claim  No.  8,  for  4,000  inches,  purported  to  be  for  a  similar  project,  diverting 
water  from  the  stream  at  the  gorge  immediately  above  the  upper  end  of  the  reservoir 
subsequently  formed  by  the  Sweetwater  Dam.  No  work  was  done  to  make  the  claim 
valid. 

Claim  No.  9,  for  4,000  inches,  was  located  as  a  part  of  the  system  of  the  San 
Diego  Flume  Company,  and  although  no  work  has  ever  been  done  upon  the  stream 
to  effect  the  actual  appropriation  of  the  water  it  has  been  alleged  that  the  claim  was 
made  valid  by  the  construction  of  the  main  flume  from  the  adjoining  stream.  This 
illustrates  one  of  the  unfortunate  features  of  the  statute  of  California  providing  for 
the  appropriation  of  water,  wherein  there  is  a  great  uncertainty  as  to  the  length  of 
time  a  filing  of  this  character  might  take  precedence  over  a  bona  fide  filing  accom- 
panied by  diligent  prosecution  of  work  and  actual  appropriation.  There  appears  to 
be  no  question,  however,  that  the  lapse  of  years,  without  any  work  whatever,  would 
invalidate  any  claim. 

Claim  No.  10  is  of  the  same  character  as  claims  Nos.  1  to  7,  and  is  located  at  the 
same  point  on  the  stream.  It  was  also  to  serve  a  project  for  supplying  San  Diego, 
and  claimed  the  modest  amount  of  20,000  inches. 

Claim  No.  11  is  in  the  same  category  as  No.  9,  and  was  filed  by  the  San  Diego 
Flume  Company  as  an  auxiliary  to  the  general  system.  The  point  of  diversion  in 
this  claim  is  in  Guatay  Valley,  over  3,500  feet  in  elevation,  and  near  the  headwaters 
of  the  river.  A  flume  and  ditch  were  projected  to  divert  this  water  across  the  divide, 
whence  it  would  flow  to  the  flume  by  way  of  the  South  Fork  of  San  Diego  River. 
Claim  No.  9,  on  the  other  hand,  was  located  at  the  lowest  point  on  the  river,  from 
which  water  could  be  diverted  into  the  company's  flume. 

Claim  No.  12,  for  10,000  inches,  was  presumably  filed  to  hold  a  sufficient  water 
supply  to  irrigate  meadow  lands  in  the  high  mountain  valleys  of  the  Cuyamaca  Ranch. 
It  is  absurdly  large,  as  the  stream  has  probably  never  carried  10  per  cent  of  this 
volume  at  the  point  where  the  appropriation  was  to  have  been  made.  There  was 
never  any  work  done  to  perfect  the  claim  or  make  the  appropriation  a  bona  fide  one. 

Claim  No.  13,  for  5,000  inches,  was  located  at  the  gorge  between  the  mouth  of 
Lawson  Creek  and  Dehesa,  where  an  elevation  of  800  to  1,000  feet  is  obtainable  for 
a  diverting  dam.  Claims  Nos.  9, 13,  14,  16,  21,  22,  and  25  in  the  above  table  are  all 
located  in  practically  the  same  place  on  the  stream,  at  a  commanding  elevation,  from 
which  water  may  be  taken  under  pressure  to  all  of  the  mesas  and  valleys  of  the 
western  portion  of  San  Diego  County.  None  of  these  claims,  however,  have  been 
succeeded  by  actual  appropriation  and  use  of  the  water. 

Claim  No.  15,  for  5,000  inches,  made  by  William  G.  Dickinson,  September  24, 
1886,  was  the  first  filing  on  the  site  of  the  present  Sweetwater  Dam,  a  few  days  before 


364  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

the  beginning  of  construction  on  the  dam  and  distribution  system.  Work  was  con- 
tinuously prosecuted  until  the  completion  of  the  system  in  April,  1888.  This  filing 
was  made,  manifestly,  in  the  interest  of  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  l>v 
its  then  general  manager,  William  G.  Dickinson,  although  in  his  individual  name. 
It  has  undoubtedly  become  a  valid  claim  upon  the  water,  and  has  priority  over  all 
others.  There  is  nothing  in  the  water-right  records  to  indicate  whether  or  not  this 
claim  has  ever  been  transferred  to  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  l>v 
Ifli:  Dickinson  or  his  heirs,  and  a  search  of  the  records  in  other  books  than  those  of 
water  claims  would  be  necessary  to  determine  this  point. 

Claim  No.  17.  On  the  1st  day  of  April,  1887,  William  G.  Dickinson  riled 
another  claim,  in  his  individual  name,  to  5,000  inches,  which  was  posted  at  the  same 
point  as  claim  No.  15,  viz,  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  and  designating  as  the  point  of  diver- 
sion "the  center  of  the  stone  dam  now  being  built  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town 
Company."  Whether  this  claim  should  be  regarded  as  supplemental  to  claim  No.  15, 
or  as  amendatory  thereto,  or  a  substitute  therefor,  is  quite  indeterminate.  Both 
claims  are  in  every  respect  alike,  and  as  there  had  been  no  cessation  of  work  between 
the  respective  dates  of  their  filing  there  could  have  been  no  forfeiture  of  the  first 
claim  which  necessitated  a  renewal  of  the  recorded  notice  to  the  world.  If  the  claim 
be  considered  as  supplemental  to  claim  No.  15,  making  a  combined  claim  of  10,000 
inches  instead  of  5,000,  the  question  arises  as  to  why  this  was  necessary  to  protect 
the  rights  of  the  appropriator,  and  what  should  be  the  interpretation  of  any  claim  to 
water  for  a  reservoir  as  these  claims  are  ordinarily  expressed.  If  an  individual  or 
corporation  builds  a  reservoir  and  files  a  claim  to,  say,  5,000  inches,  and  the  flow  of 
the  stream  in  freshet  sometimes  exceeds  the  5,000  inches  by  fifty  or  one  hundred  times, 
should  they  be  limited  to  the  5,000  inches  while  it  was  flowing,  and  be  required  to 
allow  the  surplus  over  and  above  5,000  inches  to  pass  by  them  to  subsequent  appro- 
priators,  if  there  were  such,  or  should  the  amount  of  the  filing  be  considered  as  an 
average  volume  of  5,000  inches  for  the  year,  or  the  irrigation  season,  or  the  rainy 
season?  Again,  if  the  reservoir  could  be  tilled  by  the  average  flow  of  5,000  inches 
for  a  shorter  period  than  the  irrigation  season,  the  definition  of  the  rights  under  the 
appropriation  of  5,000  inches  would  still  be  very  obscure  and  susceptible  of  serious 
conflict  if  there  were  contending  claims  to  the  stream. 

Claim  No.  20,  for  75,000  inches,  filed  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company, 
through  William  G.  Dickinson,  general  manager,  August  24,  1888,  was  evidently  the 
outcome  of  a  discussion  of  these  questions,  and  in  order  to  make  the  appropriation 
cover  all  the  flow  of  the  stream  up  to  what  was  supposed  to  be  the  extreme  limit  the 
amount  was  placed  at  75,000  inches  (1,500  cubic  feet  per  second),  which  was  the  esti- 
mated maximum  discharge,  judging  by  high-water  marks  remaining  in  the  canyon  at 
the  time  the  dam  was  built.  This  discharge  was  greatly  exceeded  during  the  freshet 
of  18!>5,  when  the  average  flow  for  one  hour  was  18,150  cubic,  feet  per  second,  or 
907,500  miner's  inches  under  a  4-inch  pressure.  The  company  did  not  need  so  much 
water,  and  would  have  been  well  satisfied  to  have  had  some  other  appropriator  take 
all  the  surplus  over  and  above  the  amounts  named  in  the  several  filings  before  it 
reached  their  reservoir.  However,  they  have  made  good  their  combined  appropria- 
tions of  85,000  inches,  whenever  such  an  amount  of  water  was  flowing  in  the  stream, 
and  these  claims  are  the  only  valid  ones  of  any  moment  on  the  river. 


WATKR    STOKAUK    ON    SWKKTWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVKBS. 

Claim  No.  16  is  not  a  filing  for  any  .specified  volume  of  water,  but  claims  "all 
reservoir  .sites  on  the  Sweetwater,  commencing  1  mile  above  .lames  Yates's  place  in 
township  16  S.,  R.  1  E.,"  which  is  in  the  general  locality  where  claims  Nos.  9, 13, 14, 
16,  21,  22,  and  25  were  posted. 

Claim  No.  17  is  a  filing  by  a  ranch  owner  living  on  the  stream  high  up  in  th( 
mountains,  some  4  miles  below  Descanso,  and  claims  "all  the  running  water  of  the 
Sweetwater  Creek,  for  irrigating  purposes."  The  filing  does  not  state  where  the 
water  is  intended  to  be  used,  but  presumably  on  the  lands  riparian  to  the  stream, 
immediately  below  the  point  of  diversion.  A  small  appropriation  has  been  made 
under  this  filing,  the  volume  of  which  is  too  insignificant  to  have  any  appreciable 
effect  on  the  reservoir  appropriations  made  below,  or  any  that  may  in  future  be  made. 

Claim  No.  19,  to  500  inches  from  Japatul  Valley,  a  tributary  of  Sweetwater 
River,  was  made  by  the  San  Diego  Flume  Company  as  a  part  of  its  general  system, 
and  is  in  the  same  condition  as  all  the  filings  made  by  this  company  on  adjacent 
watersheds,  where  no  actual  work  of  appropriation  has  been  performed.  The  claim 
is  doubtless  invalid. 

Claims  Nos.  -21  and  22,  for  "2,000,000  inches,"  may  be  classified  among  the  boom 
absurdities  which  came  to  naught. 

Claim  No.  23  is  for  "500  inches  of  water"  from  Lawson  Valley  Creek,  a  small 
tributary  of  Sweetwater  River.  The  object  of  the  filing  was  evidently  for  local 
farming  appropriation.  The  stream  is  normally  of  very  slender  volume  and  the  only 
actual  use  made  of  it  in  irrigation  is  by  a  farmer  residing  on  a  small  tract  at  its 
mouth,  and  gathering  about  30  miner's  inches  into  a  small  flume. 

Claim  No.  24  is  for  5,000  inches,  and  is  located  so  near  the  head  of  the  stream  as 
to  be  insignificant  in  actual  realization.  It  was  intended  for  local  use,  and  a  ditch  has 
been  built  to  divert  the  water  of  Guatay  Valley  upon  the  adjacent  meadows  and  field* 
of  alfalfa,  but  the  actual  appropriation  is  small  and  is  practically  negligible  in  its 
effect  upon  reservoirs  located  down  the  stream. 

Claim  No.  25,  for  "15,000  cubic  feet  per  second,"  was  made  by  the  San  Diego 
Land  and  Town  Company  at  a  time  when  they  seriously  contemplated  the  construc- 
tion of  a  second  reservoir  on  the  stream  at  a  point  above  and  near  the  mouth  of 
Lawson  Creek,  about  one  year  subsequent  to  the  great  flood.  The  purpose  held  in 
view  in  constructing  this  secondary  dam  and  reservoir  was  to  conserve  more  water, 
and  at  the  same  time  command  higher  lands  belonging  to  the  company,  which  needed 
a  water  supply.  The  large  volume  of  water  brought  down  by  the  stream  during  the 
freshet  brought  with  it  a  regret  that  there  was  not  more  storage  capacity  to  impound 
it.  The  company  made  surveys  of  the  dam  site  and  reservoir  basin,  and  found  a 
satisfactory  dam  site  where  the  width  of  the  gorge  is  but  50  feet  at  bottom,  and  320 
feet  wide  at  a  height  of  70  feet.  The  walls  are  of  hard  granite,  of  excellent  quality 
for  building  purposes.  The  reservoir  will  cover  an  area  of  147  acres  at  the  70-foot 
contour,  and  impound  3,470  acre-feet.  A  dam  at  least  150  feet  high  will  probably 
be  required  to  form  a  reservoir  of  equal  capacity  to  the  one  already  built.  The  new 
dam  site  would  have  an  elevation  of  1,230  feet  at  the  base.  The  company  did  no 
work  to  perfect  its  title  to  the  water,  and  the  claim  is  invalid.  The  size  of  the  claim, 
"  15,000  cubic  feet  per  second,"  is  an  indication  of  the  opinion  of  the  engineer  that 


366  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS   IN   CALIFORNIA. 

this  amount  would  cover  the  entire  stream  flow  of  maximum  floods,  even  in  a  freshet 
like  that  of  1895,  the  previous  year. 

Claim  No.  26,  for  35  inches,  represents  a  temporary  appropriation  made  of  the 
stream  some  4  miles  below  the  dam.  The  flow  at  this  point  is  intermittent  at  host, 
but  since  the  building  of  the  dam  is  only  apparent  after  the  reservoir  is  filled. 

Claims  No.  27,  28,  29,  30,  and  31,  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company 
at  different  points  in  the  Sweetwater  Valley  below  the  dam,  are  for  the  protection  of 
the  well  developments  supplying  the  various  pumping  plants  erected  in  the  past  two 
years  for  obtaining  an  auxiliary  supply  to  the  system,  rendered  necessary  by  drought. 
Claim  No.  27  is  for  500  inches  and  the  others  are  for  1,000  inches  each,  or  4,500 
inches  in  all.  The}7  are  all  claims  upon  the  underflow,  and,  although  they  are  each 
of  larger  volume  than  the  total  amount  which  has  been  developed,  they  have  all  been 
made  valid  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  by  the  construction  of  plants  with  which  to 
collect  and  draw  the  water  to  the  surface,  and  make  good  the  appropriation  to  the 
utmost  possible  extent. 

The  appropriation  of  subterranean  water  is  legal  according  to  a  recent  decision 
of  the  California  supreme  court  in  the  case  of  the  Vineland  Irrigation  District  /•.  The 
Azusa  Irrigating  Company  et  al. 

The  following  extract  from  the  syllabus  of  the  case  (126  Cal.,  486)  gives  the 
general  tenor  of  the  decision  on  this  important  point,  which  had  never  previously 
been  clearly  decided:  " 

(1)  The  subsurface  flow  of  streams  in  this  State  may  be  appropriated  for  useful  purposes  by  proper 
means  for  the  development  and  use  thereof,  with  due  regard  to  the  prior  rights  of  others  in  the  stream. 
Such  appropriation  is  legal  only  in  so  far  as  it  does  not  imperil  or  impair  the  superior  rights  of  others 
in  the  surface  flow  of  the  stream. 

Reviewing  the  recorded  claims  to  water  from  the  Sweetwater  River,  as  they 
appear  on  the  records,  it  is  impossible  for  any  person  unfamiliar  with  the  stream  or 
the  country  and  its  inhabitants  to  be  able  to  judge  which  of  the  claims  are  valid  and 
which  are  not,  which  are  repetitions  and  refilings,  and  which  of  any  two  or  more 
filings  by  the  same  parties  are  merely  amendatory  of  previous  filings  or  additions  to 
prior  claims.  There  are  31  claims  in  all,  aggregating  4,923,535  miner's  inches  under 
a  4-inch  pressure,  while  the  average  flow  for  thirteen  years  has  been  but  1,000  inches. 
The  claims  are,  therefore,  for  about  5,000  times  the  existing  supply. 

As  far  as  the  writer  is  able  to  judge  but  ten  of  these  recorded  claims,  one  of 
which  ten  is  quite  indefinite  as  to  amount,  have  been  made  good  by  actual  appropria- 
tion, viz,  claims  No.  15, 18,  and  20,  for  85,000  inches  in  the  aggregate,  for  the  supply 
of  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  and  owned  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company; 
claims  No.  27,  28,  29,  30,  and  31,  by  the  same  company,  covering  an  aggregate  of 
4,500  inches  of  the  underflow  of  the  stream  below  the  dam;  claim  No.  17,  by  Charles 
Ellis,  on  the  Upper  Sweetwater,  of  "all  the  running  water,"  and  claim  No.  24,  by 
Frederick  D.  C.  Meyers,  for  5,000  inches.  The  aggregate  of  the  nine  claims  which 
state  definitely  the  volume  claimed  is  94,500  inches  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure, 
which  is  equivalent  to  1,890  cubic  feet  per  second.  This  great  aggregate  seems  quite 
moderate  when  compared  with  the  extreme  flood  volume  of  the  river,  as  the  greatest 
recorded  flood — that  of  1895 — was  nearly  ten  times  this  quantity  at  the  period  of  the 
maximum  flow. 


WATER   STORAGE   ON   SWEETWATER    AND   SAN   JACINTO   RIVERS.  367 

DIFFICULTY  OF  FINDING  CLAIMS  TO  WATER  IN  RECORDS. 

The  claims  to  water  which  were  filed  in  San  Diego  County  prior  to  1893  were 
recorded  in  the  miscellaneous  records  and  scattered  through  six  volumes,  with  no 
clue  to  their  whereabouts,  except  the  note  of  "water  notice"  in  the  index.  To  find 
any  claim  posted  prior  to  1893,  therefore,  it  is  necessary  to  look  at  every  one  in  the 
index  which  is  marked  "water  notice,"  a  task  which  is  laborious,  to  say  the  least. 
In  the  first  two  volumes  of  the  water-claim  records  there  is  no  index  to  the  streams, 
and  to  find  the  claims  filed  upon  any  stream  it  is  necessary  to  examine  every  claim 
recorded  in  the  first  two  volumes  of  water  claims,  as  well  as  those  in  the  six  volumes 
of  miscellaneous  records.  The  third  volume  is  so  indexed  that  any  claim  upon  any 
stream  can  be  quickly  found,  and  the  records  are  conveniently  arranged  for  refer- 
ence, as  they  should  be.  In  cases  of  county  division  the  claims  to  water  on  certain 
streams  must  be  looked  for  in  the  records  of  both  counties  at  their  respective  county 
seats.  An  example  of  this  sort  occurs  in  the  division  of  San  Diego  County  to  form 
Kl\  rrside  County.  San  Jaciuto  River  is  not  wholly  within  the  boundaries  of  River- 
side County,  and  one  who  is  in  quest  of  information  as  to  the  claims  of  water  on  that 
stream  must  visit  the  county  seats  of  both  counties,  130  miles  apart,  and  search 
through  the  records  of  each.  In  Riverside  County  the  water  records  were  begun 
June  9,  1893,  and  from  that  time  to  May  15,  1900,  something  over  300  claims  had 
been  filed.  They  are  all  recorded  in  one  book  devoted  to  water  claims,  with  an  index 
which  shows,  in  separate  columns,  the  month,  day,  and  year  of  the  posting  of 
the  notice;  the  month,  day,  and  year  of  the  recording'of  the  claim,  the  name  of  the 
claimant,  the  stream  upon  which  the  claim  is  made,  and  the  book  and  page  of 
the  record.  This  is  a  very  satisfactory  index,  and  one  can  find  all  claims  to  any 
particular  stream  by  simply  going  through  all  of  the  index.  The  methods  and 
records  of  the  newer  county  in  this  respect  are,  therefore,  much  in  advance  of  those 
of  the  older  one. 

In  neither  of  them,  however, 'is  there  any  way  of  determining  the  validity  of  the 
claim  from  any  existing  record/  There  is  an  entire  absence  of  anything  like  an 
adjudication  of  water  rights,  or  any  sort  of  proof  of  the  validity  or  invalidity  of  the 
great  mass  of  recorded  filings.  The  law  does  not  require  any  such  proof  to  be  made, 
and  therefore  none  is  made  and  the  records  are  barren  of  all  evidence  as  to  whom  the 
water  really  belongs.  No  doubt  there  are  valuable  rights  that  have  been  acquired  on 
the  stream,  but  no  one  knows  definitely  their  extent  or  volume,  and  such  information 
can  be  acquired  only  by  a  formal  judicial  inquiiy  and  a  determination  made  by  court 
decree. 

UNRECORDED  WATER  RIGHTS. 

There  are  water  rights  existing  in  the  stream  which  depend  for  their  validity 
upon  actual  appropriation  and  prescriptive  use,  and  not  upon  a  recorded  claim.  The 
first  of  these  above  the  Sweetwater  Reservoir  was  a  ditch  appropriation  made  by 
David  Little,  on  lands  at  the  head  of  the  reservoir.  A  small  ditch  was  taken  out  in 
the  rocky  gorge  above  the  reservoir  and  used  to  irrigate  a  few  acres,  but  it  was 
abandoned  in  1887.  The  land  from  above  the  point  of  diversion  to  and  including 
the  original  tract  irrigated  was  purchased  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Com- 
pany in  1895,  after  the  dam  and  reservoir  were  enlarged. 


368  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

Some  4  or  5  miles  higher  up  the  stream,  in  the  Jamacha  Valley,  a  development 
and  diversion  of  underground  waters  was  made  and  installed  about  1896  by  George 
L.  Davis.  The  development  was  made  by  means  of  an  inverted  flume  placed  about 
10  feet  under  the  surface.  About  40  miner's  inches  of  water  is  said  to  be  available 
by  this  development  in  the  dry  season  of  the  current  year,  1900.  The  water  is  raised 
to  the  surface  and  delivered  to  a  reservoir  with  some  350  feet  lift  by  the  use  of  a 
25-horsepower  gasoline  engine. 

Some  4  miles  higher  up  the  stream  on  sec.  16,  T.  16  S.,  R.  1  E.,  Mr.  R.  C.  Allen 
has  a  well,  dug  in  1893,  10  feet  in  diameter,  25  feet  deep,  and  1,000  feet  from  the 
bank  of  the  stream  channel,  from  which  he  pumps  water  to  irrigate  his  vineyard 
and  olive  orchard,  using  a  Webber  high-lift  centrifugal  pump  and  an  8-horsepower 
gasoline  engine.  The  maximum  lift  is  about  70  feet,  but  much  of  the  water  is  lifted 
but  10  to  15  feet.  In  ordinary  seasons  he  can  pump  35  to  40  miner's  inches,  but  in 
1899  and  1900  he  was  able  to  draw  only  25  inches  from  the  well.  The  well  was  rather 
unsatisfactory  prior  to  the  freshet  of  1895,  and  gave  a  meager  supply  of  water,  but 
the  flood  waters  of  that  freshet  filled  the  river  bed  with  sand  and  raised  the  plane  of 
saturation  throughout  the  valley  to  such  an  extent  that  the  well  has  since  been  inex- 
haustible with  the  plant  installed.  Where  the  water  level  was  formerly  14  feet  below 
the  surface  in  the  well,  it  now  stands  at  7  feet. 

The  well  was  sunk  by  means  of  a  casing  or  shoe  of  galvanized  iron,  so  perforated 
as  to  permit  water  to  enter,  but  to  keep  out  quicksand.  This  shoe  is  5  feet  in  height, 
and  heavily  braced  with  angle  irons  inside.  Above  this  shoe  the  lining  of  the  well 
was  continued  with  a  circular  brick  wall  of  the  same  diameter,  reaching  to  the  surface. 
It  was  hoped  to  be  able  to  pass  through  the  quicksand  by  this  device,  but  they  had 
to  stop  in  the  quicksand  at  a  depth  of  25  feet. 

At  the  mouth  of  Lawson  Creek,  Judge  W.  A.  Sloane  has  a  ranch  irrigated  with 
water  taken  from  Lawson  Creek.  The  ditch  has  a  capacity  of  10  to  15  miner's 
inches,  and  the  area  irrigated  is  30  to  40  acres. 

There  are  also  several  small  irrigation  plants  in  Green  Valley,  Japatul  Valley, 
and  Viejas  Valley,  with  water  from  the  living  streams,  and  in  the  main  valleys  of  the 
stream  below  are  numerous  wells  from  which  water  is  pumped  for  irrigation  and 
domestic  use  on  a  small  scale,  none  of  which  have  corresponding  claims  to  water  on 
file  in  the  county  records.  The  aggregate  of  these  is  small  and  unimportant. 

Below  the  dam  a  development  and  appropriation  of  underground  water  was 
made  in  1898  without  filing  a  claim  to  it  in  the  county  recorder's  office,  by  Mr.  C.  A. 
Hardy,  at  the  Bonnie  Brae  Alfalfa  Ranch.  A  sump  was  excavated  by  scrapers  and 
teams,  and  water  percolated  into  it  from  the  sides  through  the  sand.  A  4-inch  cen- 
trifugal pump,  actuated  by  a  4-horsepower  gasoline  engine,  was  installed  and  pumped 
about  25  miner's  inches  of  water  to  supplement  the  inadequate  supply  of  the  Sweet- 
water  system.  A  fine  growth  of  alfalfa  was  maintained  by  this  means,  but  the  con- 
stant scraping  with  teams  required  to  keep  up  the  supply  in  the  sump  pit,  and  the 
cost  of  pumping,  rendered  the  scheme  unprofitable,  and  it  was  abandoned  in  August, 
1898,  the  land  reverting  to  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  from  whom  it 
had  been  purchased  on  a  partial  payment  basis. 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    8WEKTWATEK    AND    SAN    JACINTO    KIVERS.  :><>',) 

THE  DUPLICATION  OF  THE  SWEETWATER  DAM   WATER  SUPPLY  SYSTEM  BY 
SUBTERRANEAN  WATER  DEVELOPMENTS. 

The  succession  of  droughts,  or  years  of  rainfall  below  the  normal,  beginning 
after  the  wet  season  of  l<v.il  ;ir,.  and  continuing  to  the  present  time,  have  compelled 
the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  to  resort  to  extraordinary  measures  to 
provide  a  sufficient  supply  for  domestic  consumption,  and  to  keep  alive  the  orchards 
depending  upon  the  system  for  their  sole  means  of  sustenance.  It  is  certainly 
unusual,  if  not  actually  unprecedented,  for  a  water  company,  depending  upon  a 
stream  run  off  and  catchment  for  its  supply,  to  be  compelled  to  dig  wells,  establish 
pumping  plants,  and  develop  an  entirely  new  and  independent  source  to  tide  over  the 
emergency  of  drought.  An  account  of  the  struggle  of  the  company  for  water  with 
which  to  substitute  the  great  lake  that  normally  exists  behind  the  dam,  but  is  now 
dry,  can  not  fail  to  be  interesting. 

The  season  of  1895-96  gave  a  run  off  of  but  1,320  acre-feet,  one  fifty -fifth  of  that 
of  the  preceding  year;  but  as  1895  had  started  with  a  full  reservoir,  the  supply  for 
1896  was  ample.  The  run  off  for  1896-97  was  again  short,  amounting  to  but  6,892 
acre-feet,  and  it  was  only  with  careful  economy  that  the  season  of  1897  was  passed 
over.  The  following  rainy  season  was  still  worse  in  yield,  as  it  gave  practically 
nothing  to  the  depleted  reservoir,  and  at  the  beginning  of  1898  the  supply  left  in  the 
reservoir  was  very  small  indeed,  and  the  season  was  passed  only  by  the  exercise  of 
the  most  rigid  economy,  by  the  apportionment  of  the  water  in  extremely  small 
quantities,  and  by  the  general  use  of  meters  on  the  system.  In  September  of  that 
year  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  installed  a  small  pumping  plant  on 
quarter-section  111  of  the  Rancbo  dc  la  Nacion,  near  Chula  Vista,  drawing  water 
from  seven  2-inch  drive-point  wells,  placed  30  feet  apart  on  a  suction  pipe,  to  which 
was  attached  a  2.5-inch  Lawrence  centrifugal  pump,  driven  by  a  5-horsepower  gaso- 
line engine.  This  produced  about  7  miner's  inches,  which  was  delivered  to  an 
adjacent  orange  orchard  belonging  to  the  company.  The  cost  was  excessive,  and  the 
plant  was  removed  after  sixty  days'  operation. 

In  October,  1898,  the  company  made  a  second  attempt  to  develop  water  on 
quarter-section  85  of  the  Rancho  de  la  Nacion,  about  1  mile  above  the  plant  just 
described.  They  put  down  eight  2-inch  drive-point  wells,  about  12  feet  deep,  30 
feet  apart,  connecting  them  by  a  4-inch  suction  pipe,  and  pumping  water  to  other 
orchards  belonging  to  the  company.  The  water  thus  developed  amounted  to  about 
10  miner's  inches,  and  was  used  only  on  the  orchards  belonging  to  the  company. 
The  plant  was  operated  for  forty-five  days,  when  it  was  dismantled.  It  consisted 
of  one  double-cylinder  well  pump,  with  cylinders  6  inches  in  diameter,  actuated  by 
a  4-horsepower  gasoline  engine. 

In  December,  1898,  as  the  reservoir  had  failed  to  fill  and  the  little  water  left  was 
unfit  for  domestic  use,  the  company  was  obliged  to  seek  for  a  domestic  supply  for 
th 3  general  public  depending  upon  its  system.  Fourteen  2-inch  drive-point  wells  were 
put  down  in  the  space  of  an  acre  or  two  of  ground  in  the  valley  near  Sunnyside,  on 
quarter  section  31.  These  were  driven  to  a  depth  of  16  feet,  and  were  spaced  30  feet 
apart.  The  pumping  plant  consisted  of  a  triplex-acting  pump,  with  plungers  5£  by 
8  inches,  actuated  by  a  5-horsepower  gasoline  engine.  About  15  miner's  inches  of 

23856— No.  100—01 24 


370  IRRIGATION     INVKSTKiATlONS    IN    CA  1,1  F<  )KNI  A. 

water  was  thus  obtained,  which  was  delivered  into  the  mains  and  was  the  main 
domestic-  supply  until  July.  18!>!>.  The  plant  was  known  as  "the  domestic  pump," 
and  supplied  domestic  water  from  the  day  of  its  installation.  December  10,  ls!>s.  until 
the  following  July,  when  it  was  substituted  by  a  larger  plant,  now  called  "pumping 
plant  No.  2,"  which  is  the  fourth  plant  installed  by  the  company,  and  was  put  into 
use  May  24,  1899,  a  short  distance  above  the  domestic  pump,  on  the  same  quarter 
section. 

The  continuation  of  the  drought  had  by  this  time  made  it  manifest  to  the 
company  that  it  was  necessary  for  them  not  only  to  continue  pumping  for  domestic 
supply  to  all  their  customers,  but  to  develop  sufficient  water  to  irrigate  the  4,000 
acres  previously  irrigated  from  the  reservoir  and  dependent  upon  the  system  for  its 
existence.  The  first  plant  put  in  for  this  purpose  consisted  of  32  3-inch  hydraulic 
wells,  placed  in  line  across  the  valley  to  a  uniform  depth  of  35  feet,  and  spaced  evenly 
30  feet  apart  along  the  suction  pipe.  This  pipe  was  10  inches  in  diameter  from  the 
pump  for  300  feet,  followed  by  300  feet  of  8-inch,  and  that  in  turn  tiv  300  feet  of 
6-inch  screw  casing  pipe,  900  feet  in  all.  The  pumping  plant  consisted  of  a  compound 
duplex  steam  pumping  engine,  with  a  capacity  for  pumping  1,750,000  gallons  in 
twenty -four  hours.  An  80-horsepower  horizontal  tubular  boiler  furnished  steam  for 
the  pump,  which  delivers  water  directly  into  the  Sweetwatcr  pipe  system.  The 
water  thus  developed  amounted  to  about  100  miner's  inches. 

While  this  plant  was  in  progress  of  installation  work  was  being  actively  pushed 
on  a  similar  plant  of  large  scale  for  development  of  additional  irrigation  water. 
This  was  located  several  miles  down  the  valley  at  Linwood  (irove,  on  quarter 
section  98,  Rancho  de  la  Nacion.  Seventy-five  3-inch  hydraulic  wells  were  put  down 
to  a  uniform  depth  of  50  feet,  spaced  30  feet  apart,  in  2  rows  along  either  side  of 
suction  mains  which  radiated  from  the  central  pumping  station  with  the  cardinal 
points  of  the  compass.  The  longest  of  these  suction  mains  was  over  one-fourth  mile. 
One  well,  No.  76,  was  bored  to  a  depth  of  270  feet.  The  total  test  yield  of  all  the 
76  wells  was  about  400  miner's  inches.  The  plant  for  pumping  consisted  of  two  80- 
horsepower  horizontal  tubular  boilers,  and  two  Worthington  compound  duplex  steam 
pumping  engines,  one  of  which  has  a  capacity  of  2,250,000  gallons  daily,  and  the 
other  1,250,000  gallons  per  twenty-four  hours.  The  works  were  installed  June  9, 
1899.  They  deliver  water  directly  into  the  mains  of  the  company. 

Continuing  the  search  for  water  the  company  next  installed  a  sixth  plant,  which 
was  a  restoration  of  the  development  of  C.  A.  Hardy,  on  quarter  section  47,  above 
described,  which  had  been  abandoned  the  previous  August.  Here,  instead  of  the 
open  sump,  the  company  put  down  fourteen  2-inch  drive-point  wells,  10  feet  deep, 
and  five  3-inch  hydraulic  wells,  50  feet  deep,  to  all  of  which  was  attached  a  5-inch 
Krogh  centrifugal  pump,  by  suitable  suction  pipe,  driven  by  a  12-horsepower  Fair- 
banks &  Morse  gasoline  engine.  This  plant  developed  33  miner's  inches,  which  was 
used  on  the  40-acre  alfalfa  field. 

At  the  same  time  that  the  last  three  plants  were  being  installed  work  was  pro- 
gressing on  two  auxiliary  pumping  plants  located  in  the  bed  of  the  reservoir  itself. 
The  first  of  these,  designated  by  the  company  as  Plant  A,  is  located  at  a  point  about 
1  mile  above  the  dam,  where  the  sandy  bottom  lands  are  about  600  feet  wide  between 


WATKK    ST<ii:.\()K    <>N    S\V  KKTW  ATKK     AND    SAX    ,IA''INT<>     KIVKKS.  o71 

the  low  mesas  of  heavy  soil  on  either  side.  Ten  wells,  or  shafts,  <;  by  r,  (Vet,  15  feet 
deep,  were  sunk  in  a  straight  line,  60  feet  apart,  and  curbed  with  wood.  A  6-inch 
suction  pipe  was  laid  in  a  trench  by  the  side  of  the  wells,  some  6  feet  deep,  with 
2-inch  branches  extending  to  and  into  each  well.  The  pump  used  was  a  5-inch  Krogh 
centrifugal,  actuated  by  a  12-horsepower  Fairbanks  &  Morse  gasoline  engine.  The 
water  was  lifted  a  total  height  of  30  feet  to  a  flume,  whence  it  flowed  bv  gravity 
down  the  reservoir  to  the  outlet  tower,  where  the  water  was  emptied  into  the  tower, 
and  so  reached  the  system  in  the  ordinary  way  under  a  head  of  about  20  feet  at  the 
dam.  This  elevation  above  the  bottom  left  an  opportunity  to  collect  a  pond  of  small 
size  below  that  level,  in  the  lower  part  of  the  reservoir  next  to  the  dam,  the  surface 
level  of  which  was  lower  than  the  surface  of  water  in  the  wells  above.  The  volume 
of  water  developed  by  this  plant  was  about  25  miner's  inches. 

The  second  plant  in  the  reservoir  bed  was  placed  about  two-thirds  of  a  mile 
above  Plant  A,  and  is  called  Plant  B.  It  was  a  duplicate  of  Plant  A  in  every  respect, 
and  yielded  the  same  quantity  of  water.  A  flume  reached  down  from  B  to  A  and  the 
water  thus  pumped  was  delivered  with  that  obtained  from  Plant  A.  Both  A  and  B 
were  discontinued  and  removed  November  L,  1899,  after  having  operated  continuously 
for  six  months,  at  the  average  yield  of  50  inches  for  the  two.  It  was  anticipated  the 
stream  would  surely  yield  a  large  run  off  during  the  season  of  1899-1900,  and  that 
there  would  be  no  further  need  of  pumps  to  maintain  the  supply.  They  were 
replaced,  however,  in  the  latter  part  of  .May,  1900,  and  resumed  pumping  about 
June  1.  The  total  yield  of  water  derived  from  the  bed  of  the  reservoir  last  year  was 
about  360  acre-feet. 

Next  in  order  of  development  are  the  two  plants  installed  by  the  Sweetwater 
Fruit  Company  at  Bonita,  in  Sweetwater  Valley.  This  company  has  lands  riparian 
to  the  stream  bed,  and  on  March  16,  1899,  installed  Plant  B  at  a  point  opposite,  the 
Bonita  schoolhouse.  This  plant  consists  of  a  5.i  by  8  inch  triplex-acting  pump, 
actuated  by  a  12-horsepower  gasoline  engine,  delivering  water  with  a  maximum  lift 
of  nearly  125  feet  through  a  4-inch  casing  pipe.  The  volume  obtained  at  this  point 
is  about  15  miner's  inches,  which  is  developed  by  means  of  an  open  trench,  excavated 
in  the  immediate  river  channel.  Theoretically  the  pump  at  60  revolutions  should 
deliver  16|  miner's  inches,  and  it  was  usually  run  at  70  revolutions  per  minute. 
With  the  allowance  for  slip,  the  delivery  was  estimated  at  15  inches.  An  auxiliary 
to  the  plant  is  a  6-inch  centrifugal  pump  for  dredging  the  sump  and  pumping  water 
to  an  alfalfa  field  and  walnut  orchard  on  the  adjacent  low  bottoms.  Plant  A  is 
located  at  the  Bonita  store  one-half  mile  below  Plant  B;  was  completed  in  April, 
1899,  and  has  developed  about  the  same  quantity  of  water,  15  miner's  inches,  from  a 
similar  open  trench  in  the  river  channel.  This  is  forced  to  the  distributing  system 
of  the  ranch  with  a  lift  of  60  feet,  by  means  of  a  5£  by  8  inch  triplex-acting 
Smith-Vaile  pump,  actuated  by  a  15-horsepower  Otto  gasoline  engine.  A  3-inch 
centrifugal  pump  is  attached  for  dredging  the  sump  at  the  pump,  and  for  low  lift  to 
supply  irrigation  to  adjacent  bottom  lands.  The  total  pumping  operations  of  the 
Sweetwater  company  for  1899  resulted  in  a  combined  discharge  from  the  two  plants 
of  about  60,000,000  gallons  or  183.6  acre-feet,  at  a  total  cost  for  fuel,  lubricating  oil, 
and  labor  of  $1,927,  or  about  $3.25  per  1.000  gallons.  Thus  the  average  cost  was 


372  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

$10.49  per  acre-foot  of  water  delivered.  This  does  not  cover  interest  on  cost  of 
plant.  The  area  irrigated  was  125  acres,  planted  to  citrus  fruit  trees,  and  Mr.  R.  C. 
Allen,  manager  of  the  company,  states  that  the  trees  were  given  more  water  per  acre 
than  they  had  ever  before  received,  even  when  the  Sweetwater  Reservoir  was  full. 

The  fine  texture  of  the  sand  surrounding  the  pumping  plant  at  Linwood  Grove 
proved  a  serious  bar  to  the  development  of  water,  as  the  passage  of  water  through 
the  sand  was  extremely  slow,  and  the  76  wells  were  unable  to  yield  as  much  as  the 
pumps  provided  could  lift.  It  became  desirable  and  necessary,  therefore,  to  provide 
more  water  to  keep  the  pumps  properly  occupied,  and  an  auxiliary  plant  was  put  in 
3,000  feet  higher  up  the  valley.  Here  the  development  consists  of  forty  2-inch  wells, 
reaching  to  a  depth  of  50  feet  from  the  surface,  the  suction  pipe  connecting  with  all 
the  wells  being  laid  in  a  trench  excavated  from  10  to  15  feet  in  depth.  The  wells  are 
arranged  in  pairs  along  the  suction  pipe,  which  is  about  1,000  feet  in  length,  and  are 
spaced  50  feet  apart,  lengthwise  of  the  pipe.  The  parallel  row  of  wells.  30  feet  from 
the  suction  pipe,  is  reached  by  branch  suction  pipes,  2  inches  in  diameter,  lying  in 
trenches  cut  at  right  angles  to  the  main,  which  is  8  inches  in  diameter.  These  wells 
are  thus  all  coupled  together  and  connected  to  a  5-inch  centrifugal  Krogh  pump, 
driven  by  a  22-horsepower  gasoline  engine,  which  lifts  the  water  about  30  feet, 
including  suction,  and  delivers  it  to  a  12-inch  pipe,  lying  on  the  surface,  by  which 
the  water  is  conveyed  by  gravity  to  the  Linwood  plant,  where  it  is  lifted  again  and 
forced  into  the  mains  against  a  head  of  about  140  feet.  This  plant  develops  about 
75  miner's  inches,  and  was  particularly  useful  last  year,  in  the  fall,  when  the  other 
plants  were  beginning  to  give  down  somewhat  in  their  yield.  It  has  been  entirely 
reconstructed  this  year,  and  the  suction  pipe  lowered  to  the  depths  mentioned. 

With  the  resumption  of  the  obligation  to  continue  pumping  an  irrigation  supply 
throughout  the  irrigation  season  of  1900  came  the  necessity  of  more  thoroughly 
exploiting  the  subterranean  reservoir  of  the  Lower  Sweetwater  Valley,  between  the 
dam  and  the  mouth  of  the  river.  A  plant  was  erected  and  installed  April  29,  1900, 
at  Bonita,  where  42  wells  were  sunk  to  a  uniform  depth  of  50  feet  below  the  surface. 
These  are  2-inch  wells,  arranged  -after  the  plan  of  the  Linwood  auxiliary  plant,  in 
pairs  every  50  feet  on  the  line  of  the  suction  main.  One  of  each  pair  is  at  the 
main  'and  the  other  30  feet  distant,  at  right  angles.  The  suction  pipe  is  placed  in  a 
trench  from  5  to  8  feet  beneath  the  surface.  This  plant  differs  from  the  others  in 
that  it  has  two  6-inch  centrifugal  pumps  in  tandem,  pumping  the  water  to  and 
through  the  30-inch  main  pipe  against  a  force  and  suction  head  of  140  feet.  In  May 
the  water  not  directly  used  was  being  forced  back  through  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  the 
gate  being  left  wide  open,  into  the  reservoir,  where  it  was  being  stored  for  use  a 
little  later  on.  The  pump  nearest  the  suction  is  driven  by  a  22-horsepower  Fairbanks 
&  Morse  gasoline  engine  while  the  other  pump  is  actuated  by  the  same  class  of 
engine,  having  28  horsepower.  The  water  developed  at  this  point  with  the  plant 
described  was  about  74  miner's  inches. 

One  or  two  additional  plants  will  probably  be  erected  and  installed  before  the 
irrigation  season  is  over.  A  deep  test  well  is  being  bored  at  National  avenue,  and 
tests  are  being  made  at  other  points.  Additional  wells  are  also  being  bored  at  the 
Sunnyside  plant. 


WATKK    STORAGE    ON     S\V  EET  \VATKK    AND    SAN    .IACINTO    RIVERS. 


373 


The  following  table  is  a  summary  of  the  various  pumping  developments  described 
in  the  foregoing  pages: 


I'n  in  pi  inj  pi,  mix  in 


\',,//i'ii  'in*ti<lli<l  i,,  1898,  1899,  and  1900. 


Serial 
No. 

Date  of 
installation. 

Location. 

Number 

(if  wells. 

I'iuincter 
of  wells. 

Volume  of 
water  re- 
ported as 
developed 

on  first  test. 

Owner. 

1 

Sept.      ,]«'.« 

7 

Inches. 

Ktneft 

ilir/ii  >'. 

2 

Oct.    —,1898 

Quarter  section  So      .... 

g 

2 

10 

Do 

3 

Dec.    10  iv.is 

14 

2 

15 

Do 

4 

Mav  21,  Isu'.i 

.1,,  

32 

3 

100 

JHIH-    9,1899 

Quarter  section  98 

75 

3 

400 

Do 

6 

Mav  —  ,  IMf.l 

Quarter  section  47  . 

/           M 

2 

\               33 

Do 

7 

do  

A  ,  1  mile  above  dam  

I             5 
10 

3 
72  by  72 

/ 
25 

Do 

8 
9 

do  
June  —,1899 

H,  If  miles  above  dam  
Bonita  scluwdhouse  

10 

(«) 

72  by  72 

25 

Do. 

10 

do  

(a) 

15 

Do 

11 

Aug.  —,1899 

Limvood  auxiliary  -  

40 

2 

75 

12 

Apr.   —.1900 

Bonita  

42 

2 

74 

Do 

Total  

267 

794 

a  Sump. 

The  first  three  of  these  plants  are  not  now  in  existence,  or  at  least  they  have 
been  substituted  by  some  one  of  the  other  nine  plants.  The  first  two,  as  heretofore 
explained,  were  experimental  and  tentative,  and  of  a  very  temporary  character. 
Most  of  the  others,  with  the  exception  of  those  in  the  reservoir,  are  well  housed, 
and  two  of  them  are  in  the  nature  of  permanent  pumping  works,  first-class  in  all 
their  appointments. 

The  plants  which  furnished  the  main  supply  of  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town 
Company  last  year  are  numbered  4,  5,  6,  8,  and  11  in  the  table.  Number  11  was 
added  quite  late  in  the  season.  The  test  yield  of  the  five  plants  was  625  miner's 
inches,  but  the  wells  did  not  long  maintain  the  large  yield  shown  at  the  time  of  their 
test,  and,  as  nearly  as  can  be  ascertained,  the  net  output  for  the  season  averaged 
only  about  235  miner's  inches.  The  pump  records  showed  a  total  volume  pumped 
for  the  season  of  610,575,500  gallons,  from  which  25  per  cent  was  deducted  for 
probable  slip  in  pumps,  making  the  estimated  actual  delivery  457,931,600  gallons. 
As  pumping  was  fairly  continuous  from  June  1  to  November  20,  the  time  of  actual 
pumping  is  reckoned  at  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  days,  making  the  delivery 
average  3,055,000  gallons  per  day,  equal  to  235  miner's  inches  measured  under  4-inch 
pressure.  The  plane  of  saturation  in  the  lower  valley  below  the  dam  was  lowered 
from  5  to  25  feet  in  the  vicinity  of  the  pumping  plants  as  the  result  of  this  pumping. 
The  total  estimated  volume  pumped  was  equal  to  1,405  acre-feet,  or  6.25  per  cent  of 
the  maximum  capacity  of  the  reservoir. 

The  writer  is  under  special  obligations  to  Mr.  H.  N.  Savage,  chief  engineer  of 
the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  for  the  data  used  in  this  report,  which  had 


:-!74  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

been  compiled  by  him  for  publication  elsewhere,  but  was  cheerfully  contributed  for 
use  in  this  connection.  He  also  acknowledges  his  indebtedness  to  Mr.  John  E.  Boal, 
general  manager,  for  information  contributed  and  attention  shown. 

The  cost  of  pumping  plants  erected  in  1X99  was  $27,00(1.  and  about  §110,000  was 
expended  or  to  be  expended  on  additional  plants  in  the  current  year  of  1900.  The 
cost  of  pumping,  including  interest  on  machinery,  depreciation,  etc..  was  estimated 
at  3.5  cents  per  1,000  gallons,  which  the  farmers  and  fruit  growers  agreed  to  pay,  in 
addition  to  the  standard  rates,  in  order  to  tide  over  the  emergency  without  serious 
loss  of  fruit  crop  or  injury  to  the  orchards.  The  extra  rates  collected,  however,  did 
not  quite  cover  the  cost  at  the  close  of  the  year  1899,  and  in  the  current  year,  I90t». 
the  rates  were  raised  to  6.5  cents  per  1,000  gallons  to  cover  the  cost  of  additional 
development  for  the  season. 

The  general  results  of  irrigation  by  the  installed  emergency  pumping  system 
have  been  quite  gratifying  in  the  main.  The  orchards  have  not  died  or  suffered 
severely,  and  in  fact  have  continued  to  bear  heavily,  although  severely  pruned  to 
enable  them  to  endure  the  drought.  A  number  of  orchardists  and  landowners,  besides 
the  Sweetwater  Fruit  Company,  have  dug  or  bored  wells,  developed  water,  and 
installed  independent  pumping  plants,  withdrawing  their  lands  from  the  company's 
system  for  the  time  being. 

Considering  the  limited  area  of  water-bearing  gravel  and  sand  beds  capable 
of  storing  water  beneath  the  surface  in  its  voids,  the  exceedingly  fine  texture  of  the 
sand  in  the  greater  part  of  the  valley  and  the  slow  percolation  to  the  wells  through 
it,  the  results  achieved  in  overcoming  the  unfavorable  conditions  imposed  by  nature 
are  quite  remarkable,  and  reflect  credit  on  the  company  and  its  engineer,  manager, 
and  other  officers. 

RIPARIAN  RIGHTS. 

The  application  of  the  English  common-law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  to  any  of 
the  streams  of  arid  America  is  a  misfortune  which  most  Western  States  and  Terri- 
tories, except  California,  have  avoided.  The  application  of  this  doctrine  to  California 
was  made  b3T  a  bare  majority  of  one  of  the.  supreme  court  of  the  State  in  the  famous 
decision  rendered  in  1881  in  the  case  of  Lux  v.  Haggin.  Always  inapplicable  in  a 
dry  country  where  irrigation  is  required,  it  is  particularly  so  when  applied  to  streams 
of  an  intermittent  character  which  can  not  be  utilized  without  storage  reservoirs. 

The  attempt  to  interfere  with  works  of  public  necessity  and  importance  by  the 
assertion  of  this  doctrine,  after  tlie  expenditure  of  large  sums  of  money,  will  always 
be  made  as  long  as  the  pernicious  doctrine  is  adhered  to  in  this  State.  The  courts 
have  been  asked  to  order  the  removal  or  destruction  of  two  large  dams  in  San  Diego 
County  to  satisfy  riparian  rights — viz,  the  Sweetwater  and  Lower  Otay  dams — and 
that  the  litigants  did  not  succeed  in  accomplishing  their  purpose  in  either  case  was 
not  due  to  an\r  lack  of  destructive  power  in  the  law. 

The  first  case  of  this  kind  was  a  suit  in  equity  in  the  circuit  court  of  the  United 
States,  ninth  judicial  circuit,  southern  district  of  California,  and  was  entitled  William 
Doyle  v.  The  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  William  G.  Dickinson,  J.  D. 


WATER    STiiIlAUK    <>N     SW  KKTWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  375 

Schuyler,  Frank  A.  Kimball,  and  Warren  C.  Kimball.  Doyle  was  the  owner  of  a 
tract  of  .">l.:->s  acres  of  land  that  bordered  on  the  Sweetwater  .stream  bed  for  about 
s:>x  feet,  nearly  '2  miles  below  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  and  in  the  spring  of  1889,  a  year 
after  the  dam  was  completed,  he  brought  the  action,  alleging  that  Sweetwater  River 
was  a  "nonnavigable,  natural,  and  permanent  water  course  or  .stream;"  that  his  land 
is  riparian  to  the  stream;  that  the  company's  dam  was  built  in  such  away  and  so 
affixed  to  and  embedded  in  the  bed  rock  as  to  permanently  obstruct  the  natural  flow 
of  the  waters  of  said  river  through  and  by  the  plaintiff's  lands;  that  the  company 
had  not  condemned  the  plaintiff's  riparian  rights,  and  that  it  was  intended  to  divert 
the  waters  of  the  stream  to  lands  chiefly  owned  by  itself,  not  riparian  to  the  stream, 
under  pretense  that  it  is  in  charge  of  a  public  use;  that  the  plaintiff's  well,  located 
4()ii  feet  from  the  river,  from  which  he  was  accustomed  to  pump  water  for  irrigation, 
would  become  dry  and  had  already  failed  to  such  an  extent  as  to  cause  him  to  lose 
about  one-half  his  usual  orange  and  lemon  crop,  etc.  He  therefore  asked  for  an 
injunction  against  the  continuance  of  the  obstruction  to  the  natural  flow  of  Sweet- 
water  River.  In  other  words,  he  wanted  the  dam  destroyed.  This  dangerous  action 
was  defeated  only  by  the  discovery  and  production  by  defendants  of  a  deed  by  which 
F.  A.  and  W.  C.  Kimball,  owners  of  the  Rancho  de  la  Nacion,  on  the  9th  day  of 
June,  1869,  conveyed  all  riparian  rights  and  rights  to  water  flowing  in  Sweetwater 
River  to  the  Kimball  Brothers  Water  Company,  a  corporation,  by  whom  these 
rights  were  in  turn  transferred  to  Lucius  G.  Pratt,  trustee  of  The  San  Diego  Land 
and  Town  Company.  This  antedated  the  sale  or  deed  of  any  of  the  lands  within  the 
Rancho'  de  la  Nacion,  including  the  lands  of  Doyle,  and,  therefore,  as  the  defendant 
corporation  owned  the  riparian  rights  which  the  plaintiff  Doyle  relied  upon  to  win 
his  case,  he  was  nonsuited. 

The  other  similar  case  has  recently  occurred,  and  was  decided  in  1899  in  the  supe- 
rior court  of  San  Diego  County  in  favor  of  the  defendant  corporation,  the  Southern 
California  Mountain  Water  Company.  This  company  is  owner  of  the  Lower  Otay  Dam, 
located  on  Otay  Creek,  the  next  adjoining  stream  parallel  to  the  Sweetwater  on  the 
south.  This  and  the  Sweetwater  Dam  are  but  5  miles  apart.  The  case  is  an  interesting 
one  as  illustrating  the  dangerous  possibilities  which  riparian  rights,  held  in  adverse 
ownership,  may  possess  in  threatening  the  destruction  of  storage  reservoirs.  The 
Otay  is  more  "  flashy  "  and  uncertain  in  its  flow  than  the  Sweetwater,  and  though  it 
sometimes  carries  a  large  flood  flow  at  other  periods,  it  may  not  flow  at  all  for  several 
\ cars  at  a  time.  It  was  therefore  to  be  expected  that,  as  it  was  practically  useless 
without  storage,  it  would  be  the  last  place  in  which  the  riparian-right  doctrine  would 
be  asserted  to  impede  or  destroy  an  enterprise  of  such  great  public  utility  and  neces- 
sity as  that  of  an  impounding  reservoir.  The  action  was  filed  April  9,  1899,  and 
was  entitled  Michael  Rauers  et  al.  v.  Southern  California  Mountain  Water  Company, 
Joseph  A.  Flint,  and  E.  S.  Babcock,  and  bears  the  number  10840  in  the  court  record 
of  San  Diego  County.  The  plaintiffs  were  17  in  number,  owning  lands  riparian  to 
the  creek,  beginning  about  5  miles  below  the  dam  and  extending  for  i  miles  farther, 
to  and  beyond  the  town  of  Otay.  The  complaint  alleges  their  riparian  rights  and 
the  great  damage  and  injury  accrued  and  to  accrue  from  the  obstruction  of  the  flow 
of  the  water,  and  asked  judgment  against  the  defendants  that  the  dam  be  removed, 


376  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

and  the  defendants  be  enjoined  forever  from  obstructing  and  diverting  the  natural 
and  full  flow  of  said  water  in  said  river.  The  attorneys  for  the  plaintiffs  failed  to 
offer  proof  that  the  dam  was  water-tight  in  its  connection  with  the  bed  rock  of  the 
stream,  and  therefore  failed  to  prove  that  the  dam  obstructed  the  natural  flow  of  the 
stream.  It  was  chiefly  on  this  ground  that  judgment  was  rendered  for  the  defendants 
by  Judge  J.  W.  Hughes,  from  whose  findings  the  following  notes  have  been  extracted: 

(1)  That  Otay  Creek  has  flowed  during  a  portion  of  each  year,  except  during  years  of  extraordi- 
nary drought;  that  the  flow  of  the  water  varies  from  none  at  all  to  a  flow  of  short  intervals,  usually 
during  the  months  of  January  and  February,  and  depends  entirely  upon  the  frequency  and  extent  of 
the  local  rainfall. 

******* 
(16)  That  none  of  the  lands  of  the  plaintiffs,  described  in  findings  2  to  15,  are  irrigated  by  said 
Otay  Creek,  except  during  a  short  period  in  the  wet  season  and  immediately  following  heavy  rains; 
that  wells  have  been  dug  in  the  bottom  of  said  river  bed,  ranging  in  depth  from  14  to  25  feet,  from 
which  some  of  the  plaintiffs  obtain  water  for  domestic  and  other  uses;  that  said  wells  are  supplied  by 
the  waters  which  percolate  through  the  soil  and  formation  underlying  the  bed  of  said  river  and  said 
Otay  Valley,  which  is  of  a  porous  nature;  that  during  the  past  two  years,  owing  to  extraordinary 
drought,  some  of  said  wells  have  not  afforded  the  supply  of  water  drawn  therefrom  in  other  and  former 
years;  that  said  river  does  not  now  and  never  has  afforded  water  for  household  and  domestic  purposes 
or  for  irrigating  plaintiffs'  lands  during  the  irrigation  season,  but  during  the  time  mentioned  in  the 
complaint  the  supply  of  water  used  by  plaintiffs  was  secured  solely  and  alone  by  means  of  said  wells, 
which  is  the  only  source  of  supply,  except  the- Otay  Reservoir  5  or  9  miles  distant  from  the  lands. 
******* 
(19)  On  June  15,  1893,  J.  A.  Flint  posted  a  notice  appropriating  "5,000  miner's  inches  of  water, 
and  in  seasons  of  freshet  or  high  water  the  whole  of  the  water  here  flowing  to  be  here  stored  in  a 
reservoir; "  that  within  sixty  days  the  said  Joseph  A.  Flint  commenced  erection  of  the  dam  mentioned 
in  said  notice,  so  as  to  store  and  impound  the  amount  of  water  appropriated,  and  he  and  his  successors 
have  since  diligently  and  uninterruptedly  prosecuted  the  work  from  said  date  to  the  date  of  this  action, 
and  have  expended  upward  of  $300,000  in  the  work.  The  Southern  California  Mountain  Water  Com- 
pany acquired  these  rights  so  appropriated  from  J.  A.  Flint;  that  since  1893  the  dam  has  impounded 
all  the  water  flowing  down  said  stream,  except  during  a  short  time  in  January,  1895,  when  the  flood 
waters  ran  over  said  dam  at  its  then  height;  that  tin.-  claim  to  own  all  the  waters  of  Otay  Creek  for 
more  than  four  years  prior  to  the  commencement  of  this  action  has  been  continuous,  open,  notorious, 
uninterrupted,  and  adverse  to  these  plaintiffs;  *  '  that  said  dam  is  constructed  above  plaintiffs' 

lands,  but  does  not  obstruct  other  than  flood  waters,  which  if  not  obstructed  would  reach  San  Diego 
Bay  at  a  distance  of  alxmt  15  miles;  that  said  obstruction  has  not  deprived  and  will  not  deprive  plain- 
tiffs of  the  use  of  water  for  any  purposes,  or  cause  any  injury  or  damage  to  any  or  either  of  them. 

The  following  findings  asked  for  by  the  defendants  were  denied: 

That  the  defendant,  the  Southern  California  Mountain  Water  Company,  has  a  prescriptive  right 
to  maintain  the  dam  described  in  the  pleadings  herein,  and  impound  in  said  reservoir  and  divert  the 
waters  of  said  Otay  Creek,  to  the  extent  and  in  accordance  with  said  notice  of  appropriation. 

That  by  reason  of  their  failure  to  protest  or  object  to  the  construction  of  the  said  dam  by  the 
Southern  California  Mountain  Water  Company  until  after  its  completion  at  a  cost  of  over  $300,000, 
plaintiffs  are  estopped  from  maintaining  this  action  against  the  Southern  California  Mountain  Water 
Company  for  the  removal  of  said  dam. 

The  fact  that  these  two  findings  were  not  allowed  or  sustained,  and  that  the  case 
was  practically  decided  on  a  technicality,  illustrates  the  urgent  necessity  that  exists 
for  a  change  in  the  application  of  the  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  to  intermittent 
streams  or  torrents,  before  they  can  be  developed  and  utilized  for  irrigation. 


WATER    STORAGE    <>N    SWKKTWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  377 

In  both  these  cases  cited  the  dams  had  in  reality  wrought  no  injury  to  the  lands 
of  plaintiffs  seeking  the  destruction  or  removal  of  the  dams.  In  the  Sweetwater  case 
the  lands  of  plaintiff'  Doyle  are  to-day  supplying  the  greater  portion  of  the  water 
pumped  into  the  Sweetwater  distributing  system  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town 
Company,  even  though  the  dam  has  been  built  for  thirteen  years,  and  during  the 
last  five  years  practically  no  water  has  passed  it  to  the  tract  in  question. 

Until  some  change  in  this  respect  is  made  in  the  laws  it  will  not  be  safe  or 
prudent  for  parties  contemplating  the  erection  of  storage  dams  to  begin  work  before 
they  have  secured  a  relinquishment  of  all  riparian  rights  on  the  stream  below  them. 
This  safeguard  is  one  which  is  not  uncommonly  resorted  to,  although  it  is  slow  and 
expensive.  The  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  holding  the  title  to  all  the 
riparian  rights  from  the  upper  end  of  its  reservoir  to  the  mouth  of  the  Sweetwater, 
is  no  longer  concerned  with  adverse  riparian  rights,  and  fears  no  further  attempts  at 
interference. 

RIGHTS  TO  WATER  FOR  MINING,  POWER,  AND  DOMESTIC  USES. 

Under  this,  the  third,  heading  of  the  letter  of  instructions  issued  for  the  guidance 
of  the  investigators,  there  is  little  to  be  said  applicable  to  Sweetwater  River.  There 
is  no  mining  within  the  limits  of  the  watershed,  and  consequently  no  water  rights 
for  mining  exist  on  the  stream.  Neither  are  there  any  valid  rights  for  power,  except 
such  as  could  be  developed  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  at  the 
Sweetwater  Dam  and  on  its  system  of  distribution.  Water  is  sold  and  used  for  power 
to  operate  one  small  mill.  The  community  under  the  Sweetwater  system  enjoys  its 
domestic  water  under  the  same  system  as  other  cities,  delivered  as  needed,  and  have 
acquired  prescriptive  rights  to  the  continued  enjoyment  of  it  in  the  future  as  in  the 
past.  All  along  the  valley  of  the  Sweetwater  above  the  reservoir  the  right  of 
residents  to  use  what  water  they  require  for  domestic  purposes  is  unquestioned. 

THE  METHODS  BY  WHICH  THE  AMOUNT  AND  CHARACTER  OF  WATER  RIGHTS 

ARE  DETERMINED. 

PRIMARY  WATER  RIGHTS. 

There  is  absolutely  no  method  discoverable  by  the  writer  by  which  the  amount 
of  valid  water  rights  obtained  by  appropriation  from  Sweetwater  River  can  be 
absolutely  determined.  This  question  has  been  discussed  in  the  notes  on  the  filings, 
and  it  has  seemed  to  the  writer  that  no  other  method  than  a  formal  judicial  inquiry 
is  competent  to  make  the  determination  of  the  nature,  extent,  and  volume  of  the 
established  rights.  The  only  records  are  those  already  described,  viz,  six  books  of 
miscellaneous  records  and  three  books  of  water-claim  records,  but  one  of  which  is 
indexed  in  a  way  to  facilitate  a  search  for  the  information  sought.  The  books  are 
accessible  enough,  as  all  county  records  are,  and  may  be  seen  every  legal  business 
day  of  the  year  between  the  hours  of  9  a.  m.  and  5  p.  m.  But  when  placed  in  one's 
hands  there  is  nothing  definite  about  them  which  will  enlighten  the  investigator  as  to 
which  of  the  jumble  of  claims  is  valid  and  constitutes  an  established  right  and  which 
does  not. 


378  IRRIGATION    INVKSTIOATIONS    IN    CALIiX)RNIA. 

If,  for  example,  any  corporation  or  individual  wished  to  consider  the  matter  of 
constructing  a  dam  and  reservoir  at  any  higher  site  on  the  stream  above  the  present 
Sweetwater  Dam,  they  would  be  unable  to  know  or  ascertain  by  any  records  in  exist- 
ence anywhere  how  much  water  was  already  owned  by  other  parties  and  how  much 
they  would  have  to  permit  to  pass  by  their  proposed  works  to  satisfy  lower  appro- 
priators  before  they  could  begin  to  store  water  themselves;  whether  they  would  have 
to  measure  out  a  certain  number  of  "inches"  claimed  by  certain  recorded  notices,  or 
permit  the  entire  stream  to  pass  by  them  until  a  certain  body  of  water  sufficient  to 
till  the  lower  reservoir  had  gone  down.  These  vague  and  uncertain  conditions  are 
sufficient  to  cause  any  investor  to  pause  and  hesitate  before  entering  upon  any  enter- 
prise involving  so  many  possibilities  for  litigation. 

SECONDARY  WATER  RIGHTS. 

There  are  four  varieties  of  claims  of  water  rights  under  the  Sweetwater  Dam 
distributing  system,  subject  to  the  adjudication  of  the  courts  upon  their  validity, 
which  I  have  designated  "secondary  water  rights,"  as  distinguished  from  those 
drawing  directly  from  the  stream,  or  primary  rights.  These  are  defined  by  Mr.  A. 
Haines,  an  attorney  residing  at  Chula  Vista,  who  has  been  employed  in  all  the  litiga- 
tion against  the  company,  as  follows: 

First.  Those  rights  arising  in  cases  where  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  having  con- 
structed its  system  and  laid  its  pipes,  mains,  and  laterals,  conveyed  land  as  "irrigated  land,"  without 
mention  of  water  in  the  conveyance.  The  validity  of  this  class  of  water  rights  depends  on  how  the 
question  of  implied  grant  is  resolved. 

Second.  Those  cases  where,  in  the  earlier  history  of  the  company,  it  voluntarily  connected  lands 
not  bought  of  it  with  its  distributing  system  and  furnished  water  to  such  lands.  The  water  rights  of 
this  class  depend  upon  the  construction  of  section  552  of  the  civil  code,  which  is  as  follows: 

"  SEC.  552.  Whenever  any  corporation,  organized  under  the  laws  of  this  State,  furnishes  water  to 
irrigate  lands  which  said  corporation  has  sold,  the  right  to  the  flow  and  use  of  said  water  is  and  shall 
remain  a  perpetual  easement  to  the  land  so  sold,  at  such  rates  and  terms  as  may  be  established  by  said 
corporation  in  pursuance  of  law.  And  whenever  any  person  who  is  cultivating  land  on  the  line  and 
within  the  flow  of  any  ditch  owned  by  such  corporation,  has  been  furnished  water  by  it  with  which 
to  irrigate  his  land,  such  person  shall  be  entitled  to  the  continued  use  of  such  water,  upon  the  same 
terms  as  those  who  have  purchased  their  land  of  the  corporation." 

Third.  The  third  class  of  water  rights  consists  of  those  rights  which  the  corporation  created  by 
express  contracts  in  writing  tor  sale  of  land,  together  with  one  acre-foot  of  water  per  annum  per  acre, 
delivered  at  the  highest  exterior  point  of  the  land,  for  a  price  for  land  and  water  in  solido,  and  subject 
to  such  further  annual  rate  as  the  corporation  had  the  right  to  establish,  pursuant  to  law. 

Fourth.  The  fourth  class  of  water  rights  are  those  created  by  express  conveyance  of  water  rights 
to  the  amount  of  one  acre-foot  per  acre  per  annum  to  land  not  bought  of  the  company,  subject  to  such 
annual  rates  as  the  corporation  should  establish  according  to  law.  This  class  of  rights  dates  fmm  the 
year  1892,  as  well  as  those  of  the  third-class.  These  water  rights  were  at  first  sold  for  $50  per  acre, 
and  later  they  were  raised  to  $100  per  acre.  Water  rights  of  this  class  for  about  200  acres  were  thus 
sold. 

The  records  in  the  recorder's  office  of  San  Diego  County  show  nothing  specifically 
respecting  water  rights  as  to  the  first  two  classes,  but  they  do  show  record  of  the 
contracts  of  the  third  and  fourth  classes,  although  it  requires  a  searcher  of  records 
to  be  able  to  find  them,  and  they  are  scattered  throughout  the  numerous  volumes  of 
deeds  and  contracts. 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWKETWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  37i) 

LITIGATION  OVER  WATER  RIGHTS,  ITS  CAUSES,  COST,  AND  INFLUENCE  ON 
IRRIGATION  DEVELOPMENT,  AND  THE  PRINCIPLES  ESTABLISHED  BY  THE 
DECISIONS  RENDERED. 

There  has  been  no  litigation,  as  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ascertain,  between 
rival  appropriatora  of  the  Sweetwater  River  waters.  As  heretofore  explained,  the 
San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  is  the  owner  of  the  only  storage  reservoir  on 
the  stream,  and  there  has  never  been  any  contest  or  question  of  the  right  of  the 
corporation  to  receive  and  impound  all  the  natural  run  off  of  the  stream,  and  none 
of  the  local  diversions  that  have  been  or  are  likely  to  be  made  for  irrigating  lands 
riparian  to  the  si  ream  above  the  reservoir  can  possibly  affect  in  any  appreciable  way 
the  supply  of  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  and  consequently  the  corporation  controlling 
that  supply  has  no  motive  for  questioning  or  attempting  to  interfere  with  such 
diversions,  abstractions,  or  appropriations.  Any  lands  irrigated  in  the  watershed 
at  iove  the  Sweetwater  Dam  must  contribute  a  portion,  at  least,  of  the  water  so  applied 
to  the  underflow  of  the  river,  and  so,  in  a  measure,  return  to  the  reservoir  below. 
The  Sweetwater  Fruit  Company,  whose  developments  below  the  dam  on  their  lands 
riparian  to  the  stream  bed  have  already  been  mentioned,  has  been  uneasy  for  some 
time  lest  the  neighboring  well  and  pump  developments  of  the  San  Diego  Land  and 
Town  Company  should  diminish  their  supply,  and  have  threatened  suit,  although 
probably  deterred  by  the  decision  in  the  Doyle  riparian  case  before  mentioned. 

THE  NATIONAL  CITY  WATER-RATE  CASE. 

There  has  been  an  abundance  of  costly  litigation,  however,  over  the  secondary 
water  rights  under  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company's  system,  which  began 
in  an  action  brought  by  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  against  the  city  of 
National  City  to  set  aside  an  ordinance  of  the  board  of  trustees,  passed  February  21, 
1895,  fixing  water  rates  for  all  uses.  The  complaint  of  the  company  was  that  the 
irrigation  rate  of  $-4  per  acre  per  annum,  fixed  by  the  city  ordinance,  was  so  low  as 
to  tend  to  deprive  the  corporation  of  its  property  without  due  process  of  law;  also, 
that  the  ordinance  made  no  provision  permitting  the  corporation  to  exact  payment 
for  a  water  right,  of  $100  per  acre,  claimed  by  it  in  cases  where  new  consumers  for 
irrigation  desired  to  be  connected  with  its  system. 

This  cause  was  decided  against  the  corporation  'by  Judge  Ross,  of  the  circuit 
court  for  the  southern  district  of  California,  the  decision  being  found  in  74  Federal 
Reporter,  page  79.  The  decree  of  the  court  created  no  small  amount  of  consterna- 
tion in  California,  because  it  held  that  water  companies,  organized  to  distribute  and 
sell  water  under  the  laws  of  the  State  from  the  public  streams,  had  no  such  property 
as  a  "  water  right"  which  could  be  sold,  and  which  they  could  require  consumers  to 
buy  as  a  condition  prior  to  the  compan3r's  consenting  to  supply  them  with  water. 
The  following  language  is  extracted  from  the  decision  referring  to  this  point: 

One  of  the  objects  of  the  present  suit  is  to  obtain  a  decree  establishing  the  validity  of  that  claim 
of  the  complainant  to  exact  a  sum  of  money,  in  addition  to  an  annual  charge,  as  a  condition  on  which 
alone  the  complainant  will  furnish  consumers  with  water  for  irrigation  purposes,  other  than  those  to 
whom  it  had  furnished  it  for  such  purposes,  prior  to  December  18,  1892,  and  the  contest  that  arose 
between  the  consumers  and  the  company  over  this  charge  for  a  so-called  "water  right,"  and  the 
refusal  of  the  municipal  authorities  of  National  City  to  allow  that  charge  in  respect  to  acreage  property 


380  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

within  the  city  limits,  is  one  of  the  principal  causes  of  the  present  suit.  It  does  not  change  the 
essence  of  the  thing  for  which  the  complainant  demands  a  sum  of  money  to  call  it  a  water  right,  or  to 
say,  as  it  does,  that  the  charge  is  imposed  for  the  purpose  of  reimbursing  complainant  in  part  for  the 
outlay  to  which  it  has  been  subjected.  It  is  demanding  a  sum  of  money  for  doing  what  the  constitu- 
tion and  laws  of  California  authorized  it  to  do,  to  appropriate  water  within  its  limits,  conferring  upon 
it  the  great  power  of  eminent  domain  and  the  franchise  to  distribute  and  sell  the  water  so  appropriated, 
not  only  to  those  needing  it  for  purposes  of  irrigation,  but  also  to  the  cities  and  towns  and  their 
inhabitants  within  its  flow,  for  which  it  was  given  the  right  to  charge  rates  to  be  established  by  law, 
and  nothing  else.  No  authority  can  anywhere  be  found  for  any  charge  for  the  so-called  water  rights. 
The  State  permitted  the  water  in  question  to  be  appropriated  for  distribution  and  sale  for  the  purposes 
of  irrigation,  and  for  domestic  and  other  beneficial  uses;  conferring  upon  the  appropriator  the  great 
powers  mentioned  and  compensating  it  for  its  outlay  by  the  fixed  annual  rates. 

This  case  was  appealed  to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  to  whom  it  was 
submitted  October  11,  1898,  and  by  whom  it  was  decided  May  22,  1899.  From  the 
following  syllabus  the  points  of  the  decision  can  be  obtained: 

(1)  Formal  notice  as  to  the  precise  day  upon  which  water  rates  will  be  fixed  by  ordinance  need 
not  be  given  to  a  company  whose  rates  are  thus  fixed  under  the  California  constitution,  which  gives 
notice  of  the  fact  that  ordinances  will  be  passed  annually  in  February,  to  take  effect  on  the  1st  of  July 
then  next. 

(2)  An  opportunity  to  be  heard  upon  the  question  of  water  rates  fixed  by  ordinance  is  not  denied 
where  such  rates  are  fully  considered  in  conference  between  the  officers  of  the  corporation  whose  rates 
are  fixed  and  the  municipal  authorities,  and  such  officers  are  heard,  although  they  are  not  allowed  to 
be  present  at  the  final  meeting  when  the  ordinance  is  passed. 

(3)  Judicial  interference  should  never  occur  with  the  collection  of  rates  established  under  legis- 
lative sanction  unless  the  case  presents  clearly  and  beyond  all  doubt  such  a  flagrant  attack  upon  the 
rights  of  property,  under  the  guise  of  regulations,  as  to  compel  the  court  to  say  that  the  rates  prescribed 
will  necessarily  have  the  effect  to  deny  just  compensation  for  private  property  taken  for  public  use. 

(4)  The  reasonable  value  of  property,  rather  than  its  original  cost,  is  to  be  taken  as  the  basis  of 
calculation  in  determining  whether  rates  fixed  under  legislative  authority  constitute  a  fair  compensa- 
tion for  the  use  of  the  property,  so  that  the  owners  are  not  deprived  of  their  property  without  due 
process  of  law. 

(5)  The  losses  from  distribution  of  water  to  consumers  outside  of  the  city  are  not  to  be  considered 
in  fixing  by  ordinance  the  rates  for  consumers  within  the  city. 

The  United  States  Supreme  Court  makes  no  decision  of  the  question  as  to 
whether  or  not,  in  fixing  the  annual  rates  to  be  charged,  the  body  authorized  to  fix 
them  can  take  into  account  the  amount  that  has  been  received  by  the  company  for 
water  rights,  or  as  to  whether  the  company  could  demand  a  sum  of  money  for  such 
water  rights,  or  "so-called  water  rights,"  as  Judge  Ross  designated  them.  Referring 
to  this,  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  says  (174  U.  S.,  739): 

*  *  *  The  present  case  does  not  require  or  admit  of  a  decree  declaring  that  the  appellant  may, 
in  addition  to  the  rates  established  by  the  ordinance,  charge  for  what  is  called  a  "  water  right"  as 
defined  by  it.  It  will  be  time  enough  to  decide  such  a  point  when  a  case  actually  arises  between  the 
appellant  and  some  person  or  corporation  involving  the  question  whether  the  former  may  require,  as 
a  condition  of  its  furnishing  water  within  the  limits  of  the  city  on  the  terms  prescribed  by  the  defend- 
ant's ordinance,  that  it  be  also  paid  for  what  is  called  a  water  right. 

WATER-KATE   CASE   OF   L.ANNING  v.    OSBOKNE   ET  AL. 

The  next  cause  to  be  brought  before  the  courts  on  the  subject  of  water  rights 
and  water  rates  was  the  result  of  the  attempt  of  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Com- 
pany to  collect,  from  and  after  January  1,  1896,  the  sum  of  $7  per  acre  per  annum 
for  water  rental,  instead  of  $3.50,  the  rate  previously  prevailing.  The  i-ax-  was 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  381 

entitled  C.  D.  Lanning,  receiver  of  the  company,  v.  H.  C.  Osbornc  and  some  200 
others,  who  were  irrigators  of  land  outside  of  National  City. 

The  complaint  showed  that  the  corporation,  in  opening  its  service  in  1888,  in 
addition  to  the  rates  for  domestic  uses  and  the  like,  established  an  irrigation  rate  of 
$3.50  per  acre  per  annum,  and  alleged  that  this  was  too  low  to  furnish  any  net 
revenue  above  the  expenses  of  maintenance  and  operation,  and  insufficient  to  maintain 
and  operate  the  system.  The  corporation  claimed  the  right  to  an  increased  rate  of 
$7  per  acre  per  annum  for  irrigation  alone,  in  order  to  pay  cost  of  operation  and 
maintenance  and  pay  the  company  a  reasonable  interest  on  its  investment.  The 
defendants  denied  the  right  of  the  corporation  to  increase  the  rate  from  $3.50  to  $7 
per  acre,  on  the  ground  that  the  company  sold  its  lands  to  a  large  number  of  the 
defendants  as  irrigated  lands,  and  under  the  representation  that  the  rates  would  be 
$3.50  per  acre  per  annum;  and  all  the  defendants  claimed  that  the  corporation  was, 
bound  by  its  rate  of  $3.50  per  acre  per  annum,  so  established  in  1888  and  collected 
up  to  January  1, 1896,  and  they  insisted  that  the  claim  of  the  corporation  to  increase 
its  rate  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  its  net  revenue  was  in  violation  of  their  vested 
rights.  To  the  claim  of  the  corporation  that  it  had  the  right  to  increase  the  rate  i 
its  discretion,  and  that  the  only  recourse  the  irrigators  had  was  a  resort  to  the  board 
of  supervisors,  under  the  law  of  March  12, 1885,  to  fix  rates,  the  defendants  objected 
that  the  board  of  supervisors  was  compelled  by  such  act  to  allow  a  rate  not  only  for 
maintenance  and  operation,  but  also  for  net  revenue,  at  not  less  than  (i  per  cent  and 
not  more  than  18  per  cent  on  the  value  of  the  S3rstem.  The  circuit  court  of  the 
southern  district  of  California,  before  whom  the  cause  was  heard,  held  that  the  only 
remedy  of  the  defendants  was  to  go  to  the  board  of  supervisors;  threw  doubt  upon 
the  validity  of  the  water  rights  held  by  the  defendants,  and  rendered  judgment 
against  them,  authorizing  the  corporation  to  collect  the  $7  rate  from  the  time  when 
claimed  by  the  company,  January  1,  1896,  until  the  board  of  supervisors  should 
fix  rates.  The  syllabus  of  the  case,  as  published  in  76  Federal  Reporter,  page 
319,  is  as  follows: 

(1)  No  corporation  appropriating  water  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  constitution  and  laws  of 
California  for  sale,  rental  or  distribution  has  the  right  to  exact  any  sum  of  money  or  other  thing  in 
addition  to  the  legally  established  rates  as  a  condition  upon  which  it  will  furnish  to  consumers  water 
so  appropriated. 

(2)  Since  by  the  civil  code  of  California  a  consumer  whose  right  to  demand  a  supply  of  water 
from  a  company  has  once  vested  is  protected  from  the  injury  of  having  his  supply  cut  off,  he  may 
prevent  by  injunction,  if  need  be,  the  distributor  from  disposing  of  it  to  others  beyond  the  capacity  o 
the  system. 

(3)  Should  the  rates  fixed  by  the  county  board  of  supervisors  for  the  sale,  rental,  or  distribution 
of  water  appropriated   for  these  purposes,  as  provided   by  acts  of  California,  March   12,  1885,   be 
unreasonable,  a  person  aggrieved  may  have  the  rates  annulled  by  the  courts,  and  the  question  be  again 
remitted  to  the  board. 

(4)  Where  water  is  appropriated  and  furnished  by  a  public  or  quasi-public  corporation,  the  water 
being  charged  with  a  public  use,  the  rates  must  he  established  in  pursuance  of  law,  and  no  attempt  to 
fix  them  by  private  contract  with  consumers  is  of  any  validity. 

(5)  Since  the  act  of  March  12,  1885,  provides  that,  in  case  of  failure  of  the  board  of  supervisors 
to  establish  rates  for  furnishing  water  as  provided  in  the  act,  the  rates  established  by  the  company 
shall  control,  the  latter  is  not  divested  of  the  power  to  fix  rates  by  the  fact  that  before  the  passage  "f 
the  act  it  contracted  to  furnish  water  at  a  lower  rate,  the  persons  with  whom  it  so  contracted  being 
chargeal ile  with  notice  that  the  constitution  conferred  power  upon  the  legislature  to  prescribe  the 
manner  in  which  such  rates  should  be  established. 


382  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

This  cause  was  also  appealed  to  Washington,  and  on  the  14th  day  of  May,  I'.Mio. 
the  United  States  Supreme  Court  rendered  its  decision,  affirming  the  decree  of  the 
circuit  court  regarding  annual  rates,  but  again  made  no  decision  on  the  subject  of 
the  power  of  the  corporation  to  sell  a  water  right. 

APPEAL  FROM  ORDINANCE  OF  SUPERVISORS   FIXING  RATES. 

Pending  the  appeal  of  this  case  the  board  of  supervisors  of  San  Diego  County, 
in  response  to  the  application  of  taxpayers  and  at  the  instigation  of  water  takers 
under  the  Sweetwater  system,  appointed  a  public  hearing,  received  evidence,  and 
after  a  long  investigation  passed  an  ordinance  fixing  the  domestic  rates  the  same  as 
the}'  had  been  in  the  past,  and  the  same  as  under  the  ordinance  held  valid  in  National 
City,  and  the  irrigation  rate  was  fixed  at  f>3.50  per  acre  per  annum,  as  in  their 
judgment  sufficient  to  give  the  company  its  legal  rights,  the  same  to  take  effect 
November  1<>,  1897.  From  this  ordinance  the  company  appealed  to  the  United  Slates 
circuit  court,  in  case  No.  7(>8,  entitled  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  /•.  .lames 
A.  Jasper  et  al.  Evidence  in  this  case  has  been  taken,  argument  was  heard  June  25, 
and  the  case  is  pending  a  decision. 

THE   NATIONAL   CITY   CASE,  ESTABLISHING   THAT   DOMESTIC  TJSE   IS   NOT 

SUPERIOR  TO  IRRIGATION. 

About  September,  1898,  a  suit  was  brought  in  the  superior  court  of  San  Diego 
Countj-  by  the  city  of  National  City  against  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company, 
which  was  not  resisted  by  the  corporation.  It  was  brought  to  restrain  the  corpora- 
tion by  injunction  from  furnishing  any  water  from  the  small  supply  then  left  in 
the  reservoir  for  any  other  uses  than  domestic.  The  theory  of  the  case  was  that,  as 
the  water  supply  in  the  reservoir  was  nearly  exhausted,  it  was  needed  for  domestic 
use,  and  such  use  should  take  preference  over  uses  for  irrigation.  The  injunction 
was  issued  against  the  company  by  its  virtual  consent,  whereupon  it  notified  all  the 
irrigators  to  stop  irrigating,  pursuant  to  the  injunction.  The  irrigators  submitted 
to  this  until  sometime  in  December,  1898,  when,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  their  lemon 
and  especially  their  orange  crop  was  suffering  for  water,  a  number  of  them  notified 
the  company  that  they  proposed  to  turn  on  the  water  for  irrigation  unless  they  were 
made  parties  defendant  and  also  enjoined.  Thereupon  these  irrigators  were  made 
defendants  to  the  injunction  suit,  a  hearing  was  had  and  the  injunction  was  dissolved, 
the  court  holding  that  the  domestic  uses  had  no  superiority  over  those  for  irrigation. 
This  case  was  not  appealed. 

THE  SHARFE  CASE. 

In  May,  1897,  James  M.  Sharpe  brought  an  action  against  the  San  Diego  Land 
and  Town  Company,  in  the  United  States  circuit  court  for  the  southern  district  of 
California,  in  which  he  alleged  that  he  was  a  landowner  under  the  system;  that  since 
tsui  the  corporation  had  been  supplying  him  with  water  for  irrigation,  and  that  in 
1897  the  corporation  had  shut  off  his  water  supply,  although  he  had  tendered  its 
established  rate,  which  was  refused  by  the  company,  the  refusal  being  accompanied 
by  the  statement  that  such  water  supply  would  not  be  continued  unless  Sharpe  would 
enter  into  a  written  contract  to  pay  the  sum  of  $11.50  per  acre  annually  for  the  land 


\VATKK    STOKAUK    ON    SWKKTWATKR    AND    SAN    JACI.N'Td     KiVKRS.  383 

irrigated,  and  also  enter  into  further  stipulations  relinquishing  all  right  and  benelit 
after  two  years,  under  section  552  of  the  code  of  civil  procedure. 

The  defense  of  the  corporation  was  that  the  water  had  been  furnished  under ^a 
contract  dated  March  26,  18!)i',  which  had  expired,  the  term  having  been  for  five 
years,  and  that  such  contract  contained  a  proviso  by  which  Sharpe  had  expressly 
waived  and  relinquished  all  right  and  benefit  under  section  552  of  the  code  of  civil 
procedure,  after  five-year  term  of  his  contract,  and  had  also  stipulated  that  all  duty, 
liability,  and  obligation  of  the  compan3r  to  furnish  water  to  his  tract  of  land  should, 
at  the  end  of  five  years,  cease  as  absolutely  .as  if  the  contract  had  never  been  made. 

The  court  granted  an  injunction  against  the  company  restraining  it  "from  shut- 
ting off  the  flow  and  supply  of  water  from  .said  company's  water  system  from  the 
petitioner's  land  described,  and  from  interfering  with  the  use  and  flow  of  said  supply 
of  water  for  irrigation  of  the  same  so 'long  as  the  petitioner  shall  pay  the  legally 
established  rates  therefor." 

This  decision  was  affirmed  by  the  United  States  circuit  court  of  appeals  for  the 
ninth  circuit,  the  decree  of  which  court  was  final.  This  case  illustrates  the  danger 
that  may  lie  to  a  water  company  in  making  a  temporary  contract  for  the  delivery  of 
water  for  a  limited  time.  Sharpe's  land  was  located  in  the  Otay  Valley  quite  a  dis- 
tance beyond  the  limits  of  the  district  supplied  with  distributing  pipes  by  the  San 
Diego  Land  and  Town  Company.  He  expected  to  get  his  permanent  supply  of  water 
from  Lower  Otay  Reservoir,  or  from  another  water  system  whose  works  were  sup- 
posed to  be  under  construction;  but  for  temporary  purposes,  and  to  get  his  trees 
started  before  the  new  system  of  irrigation  could  be  finished,  he  persuaded  the  man- 
ager of  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  to  permit  him  to  connect  with  the 
Swcetwater  system  temporarily,  agreeing  to  disconnect  at  the  end  of  five  jrears. 
This  was  done  under  protest  of  the  engineer  of  the  system,  as  the  connection  was 
one  exceedingly  difficult, to  maintain,  and  involving  extra  expense  in  getting  a  water 
supply  to  the  lands  when  the  supply  in  the  reservoir  became  low.  As  the  other 
systems  were  never  completed  Sharpe  coidd  not  get  water  anywhere  else,  and  at 
the  expiration  of  the  time  appealed  to  the  courts  to  save  him  from  the  consequences 
of  his  own  express  contract,  and  prevent  him  from  being  deprived  of  water,  which 
they  did. 

THE  HALE  WATER-RIGHT  CASE. 

Pending  the  case  of  Lanning  v.  Osborne  in  the  United  States  circuit  court, 
before  Judge  Ross,  and  after  he  had  rendered  an  opinion  in  ihe  progress  of  that 
cause,  holding  that  a  corporation  could  make  no  contracts  for  sale  of  water  rights, 
one  G.  W.  Hale,  having  paid  the  San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  $100  per  acre 
on  15  acres  of  land  under  the  company's  system  for  a  water  right,  in  order  that  he 
might  procure  water  for  the  irrigation  of  the  same,  and  having  taken  from  the 
corporation  a  contract,  under  which  they  agreed  to  refund  to  him  the  $1,500  paid  if 
it  was  decided  that  the  corporation  could  not  legally  sell  or  exact  pay  for  a  water 
right,  assigned  his  claim  for  rebate  to  the  Bank  of  National  City.  Subsequently  the 
bank  brought  suit  against  the  company,  before  Judge  Ross  in  the  United  States 
circuit  court,  for  the  refunding  of  this  money,  with  interest,  and,  after  trial, 
recovered  judgment,  which  was  paid.  The  case  was  not  appealed. 


384  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

COST  OF  WATER  LITIGATION. 

The  cost  of  litigation  in  the  various  disputes  over  water  between  the  San  Diego 
Land  and  Town  Company  and  the  irrigators  has  been  estimated  as  in  excess  of 
$20,000,  and  there  is  still  much  uncertainty  regarding  respective  rights. 

The  effect  of  this  litigation  on  irrigation  development  and  the  values  of  land  has 
been  very  disastrous. 

RIGHTS  FOR  STORAGE  AND  UNDERGROUND  WATERS. 

On  this  subject  but  little  can  be  said  as  applicable  to  the  Sweetwater  system 
which  is  not  general  to  the  whole  State.  The  only  recognized  rights  to  storage  and 
underground  waters  are  those  which  are  granted  to  all  persons  under  the  water 
appropriation  law  of  the  State,  and  can  not  be  distinguished  from  the  rights  granted 
by  the  same  act  to  the  surface  flow  of  the  streams.  The  use  of  underground  water 
on  this  watershed  is  too  small  in  volume  to  affect  the  discharge  of  the  stream 
appreciably  or  at  all. 

NATURE  OF  AN  APPROPRIATION  OF  WATER. 

I  think  it  is  universally  held  throughout  California  that  the  ditch  or  reservoir 
builder  is  the  appropriator  of  the  water,  and  not  the  land  itself.  On  this  system  no 
assertions  of  being  actual  appropriators  of  the  water  have  been  made  by  the  land- 
owners in  all  the  litigation  that  has  arisen,  nor  any  allegations  that  the  San  Diego 
Land  and  Town  Company  is  merely  a  common  carrier  for  the  people,  as  has  been 
maintained  in  Colorado.  There  is  some  difference  of  opinion,  however,  as  to  whether 
or  not  the  company  owns  the  corpus  of  the  water  impounded  in  its  reservoir,  as 
distinguished  from  the  "right  of  use"  of  the  water  of  a  flowing  stream.  It  would 
seem  to  the  writer  as  though  they  had  seized,  captured,  and  impounded  the  water, 
and  owned  it  as  absolutely  as  though  they  had  put  it  into  bottles,  or  in  any  other 
form  by  which  it  might  be  shipped  away.  They  sell  it  by  volume  and  measure  it 
out  in  regular  units  of  measurement,  so  many  thousands  of  gallons  being  apportioned 
to  each  acre,  and  no  one  has  any  more  right  to  intrude  upon  the  reservoir  site  to  take 
any  of  the  water  stored  therein,  even  though  the  reservoir  may  be  a  part  of  the 
stream,  than  they  would  have  to  enter  a  warehouse  and  take  the  merchandise  stored 
there.  To  the  extent  of  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir  the  company  is  absolute  owner 
of  all  water  which  flows  in  the  stream  down  to  the  margin  of  the  reservoir. 

There  should  be»a  modification  in  the  appropriation  laws  when  applied  to  reser- 
voirs in  the  way  of  defining  the  appropriation  made  for  them,  and  instead  of  express- 
ing such  appropriation  in  miner's  inches  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  as  at  present,  the 
amount  appropriated  should  bear  some  fixed  relation  to  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir, 
and  should  either  be  a  stated  number  of  acre-feet  per  annum,  or  it  should  be 
expressed  in  reservoirfuls.  Also,  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir  in  acre-feet,  or  some 
other  convenient  unit,  should,  be  known  and  stated  in  the  notice  of  appropriation. 

RETURN  SEEPAGE  AND  ITS  EFFECT  ON  WATER  RIGHTS. 

The  return  water,  or  seepage,  from  irrigation  along  the  Sweetwater  Valley  is 
manifest  in  but  one  case  very  conspicuously.  When  a  certain  alfalfa  field  of  40 
acres  in  area  at  Bonnie  Brae  is  irrigated  sufficiently  to  maintain  the  crop  in  vigor- 


WATER   STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  385 

ous  growth,  there  is  a  pronounced  increase  in  the  supply  available  at  the  pumping 
sumps  of  the  Sweetwater  Fruit  Company,  a  mile  or  two  below.  This  company  has  a 
frontage  of  about  3,000  feet  on  the  stream  bed,  which  enables  it  to  develop  water  by 
pumping,  us  heretofore  described. 

The  irrigation  of  land  in  the  bottom  above  adds  very  decidedly  to  the  value  of 
the  water  rights  of  this  company.  The  greater  portion  of  the  area  irrigated  under 
the  Sweetwater  system,  however,  is  mesa  land,  from  which  there  has  as  yet  been  no 
seepage  water  returning  to  the  stream,  as  far  as  observed. 

METHODS  OF  DISTRIBUTION  AND  DUTY  OF  WATER. 

Water  is  distributed  under  the  Sweetwater  system  exclusively  in  pipes  under 
pressure.  The  irregular  contour  of  the  topography  of  the  region  renders  this  almost 
a  necessity,  but  it  has  many  advantages,  and  the  irrigators  under  the  system  have  all 
the  water  privileges  enjoyed  by  the  inhabitants  of  cities  and  towns,  and  equally  good 
tire  protection,  especially  on  the  lower  levels.  When  the  water  is  low  in  the  reser- 
voir, the  higher  lands  near  the  maximum  hydraulic  grade  line  are  supplied  with  much 
difficulty. 

The  pipe  distributing  system,  as  originally  constructed,  consisted  of  5.64  miles 
of  main  conduit,  36  inches  and  30  inches  in  diameter,  reaching  from  the  dam  to  Chula 
Vista;  1.54  miles  of  24-inch  pipe;  3.13  miles  of  18-inch  pipe;  6.80  miles  of  12-inch 
pipe;  2.22  miles  of  8-inch;  28.4  miles  of  6-inch,  and  9.6  miles  of  4-inch  pipe,  a  total 
of  58  miles,  all  wrought  iron.  Of  this,  41  miles,  or  70  per  cent,  is  lap-welded  pipe 
put  together  with  lead  joints.  A  second  main,  24  inches  in  diameter,  was  laid  in 
1894,  on  the  north  side  of  Sweetwater  Valley,  from  the  dam  to  National  City,  to 
supply  the  high  service  chiefly.  This  line  cost  $65,000.  Numerous  extensions  have 
subsequently  been  built,  so  that  the  system  fully  covers  an  area  of  more  than  5,000 
acres.  The  total  outlay  for  the  dam  and  distributing  system  has  been  $1,026,022.79, 
aside  from  the  cost  of  pumping  plants. 

The  duty  of  water  has  been  discussed  in  previous  pages  in  a  general  way.  It  has 
been  demonstrated  during  the  recent  protracted  droughts  that  with  an  annual  allow- 
ance of  105,000  gallons  per  acre  per  annum,  applied  at  intervals  during  the  summer, 
the  orchards  thrive.  Of  course  continuous  cultivation  is  required  at  the  same  time. 
This  meager  apportionment,  equal  to  3.85  inches  in  average  depth  over  the  surface, 
is  surely  a  minimum  allowance.  A  cubic  foot  per  second,  flowing  for  two  hundred 
days,  which  is  the  usual  length  of  the  irrigating  season,  would  cover  1,234  acres  to 
the  depth  represented  by  this  allowance.  In  flush  seasons,  when  water  is  abundant, 
the  use  of  water  reached  as  high  as  1.5  to  2  feet  depth  of  application,  equal  to  a  duty 
of  264  to  198  acres  per  cubic  foot  per  second  flowing  for  a  period  of  two  hundred 
days.  The  allowance  of  one  foot  in  depth,  which  is  generally  satisfactory,  and  which 
the  company  ordinarily  expects  to  deliver  whenever  it  has  water  in  its  reservoir,  is 
equivalent  to  a  duty  of  395  acres  per  cubic  foot  per  second,  flowing  during  two 
bundled  days  of  irrigation. 

WATER-BIGHT  CONTRACTS,  WATER  RATES,  ETC. 

Although  the  Sweetwater  system  was  completed  in  1888,  and  irrigation  begun  in 
that  year,  no  water-right  contracts  were  sold  prior  to  1892,  as  up  to  the  latter  date 

23856— No.  100—01 25 


386  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

the  company  gave  little  intelligent  consideration  to  their  plans  for  the  apportionment 
of  their  supply.  The  following  classes  of  rights  are  regarded  by  the  company  as 
identical: 

First.  Those  belonging  to  parties  who  purchased  land  from  the  company  and  had 
a  tacit  right  to  water  from  the  system,  although  no  reference  to  water  was  made  in 
the  deeds. 

Second.  Those  belonging  to  owners  of  land,  not  purchased  of  the  company,  who, 
by  applying  to  the  company,  were  allowed  to  take  water  without  payment  further 
than  the  same  annual  rates  charged  to  all  land  owners. 

Third.  Those  belonging  to  owners  of  land  who,  after  1892,  purchased  the  water 
right  for  a  lump  sum — a  price  started  at  $50  per  acre  and  later  raised  to  $100  per  acre. 

The  following  form  of  contract  was  used  for  the  third  class  of  water  rights: 

WATER-RIGHT  CONTRACT. 

This  agreement,  made  and  entered  into  this day  of ,  189 — ,  by  and  between  the  San 

Diego  Land  and  Town  Company,  a  corporation  existing  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  the  State 
of  Kansas,  and  the  owner  of  certain  water  and  water  rights  and  a  system  for  the  delivery  of  water  to 

consumers,  in  the  county  of  San  Diego,  State  of  California,  party  of  the  first  part,  and , 

of ,  county  of  —  — ,  State  of  —  — ,  party  of  the  second  part; 

Witnesseth:  That  the  party  of  the  first  part  agrees  to  and  does  hereby  sell  to  the  party  of  the 
second  part  a  water  right  to  1  acre-foot  of  water  per  acre  per  annum  for  each  and  every  acre  of  the  real 
estate  hereinafter  described,  to  be  delivered  through  the  pipes  and  flumes  of  the  party  of  the  first  part 

at  —  —  for  the  sum  of  —  —  dollars,  payable  as  follows: —  Provided,  the  party  of  the 

first  part  may,  at  its  option,  change  the  place  of  delivery  of  said  water  so  long  as  the  same  is  near  the 
highest  point  on  the  lands  for  which  the  water  is  delivered,  and  provided  further,  that  the  same  shall 
•  be  delivered  under  and  in  accordance  with  the  rules  and  regulations  established  from  time  to  time  by 
the  party  of  the  first  part. 

Said  water  right  is  sold  for  the  use  of  and  to  be  appurtenant  to  the  following-described  real  estate 
now  owned  by  the  party  of  the  second  part  in  the  county  of  San  Diego,  State  of  California,  to  wit: 

(Here  follows  description  of  land)  consisting  of acres.  And  it  is  expressly  understood  and  agreed 

that  the  water  right  hereby  sold  shall  belong  to  said  described  real  estate  and  be  used  thereon  and  not 
diverted  therefrom  or  used  on  any  other  lands. 

In  consideration  of  the  foregoing  stipulations  and  agreements  the  party  of  the  second  part  agrees 

and  binds -self, heirs,  executors,  and  assigns,  to  pay  the  sum  above  specified  promptly,  as  the 

same  and  each  of  them  fall  due;  and  that  —  -  will  in  all  things  comply  with  and  perform  the 
terms  and  conditions  of  this  agreement  on  —  —  part  to  be  performed,  and  that  —  —  and 

they  will  promptly  pay  all  annual  water  rates  and  charges  for  the  water  to  which  —  —  is 

entitled  under  and  by  virtue  of  this  agreement,  at  rates  fixed  by  the  party  of  the  first  part,  as  allowed 
by  law,  and  at  the  times,  in  the  manner,  and  according  to  the  rules  and  regulations  made  and  adopted 
by  the  party  of  the  first  part,  the  annual  rental  for  the  amount  of  water  to"  which  the  party  of  the 
second  part  is  entitled  under  this  contract  to  be  paid  whether  the  same  is  used  or  not,  and  also  to  pay 
for  all  water  used  by  —  —  on  said  land  for  domestic  purposes  at  the  rates  fixed  by  the  party 

of  the  first  part  and  allowed  by  law. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  the  amounts  hereby  agreed  to  be  paid  for  said  water  right  and  for  the 
rates  for  the  water  shall  be  a  charge  and  lien  upon  the  real  estate  above  described,  and  run  with  and 
be  binding  thereon,  in  the  hands  of  the  party  of  the  second  part,  —  —  heirs,  executors,  and  assigns, 
in  the  same  manner  and  to  the  same  extent  as  if  a  mortgage  were  given  to  secure  the  payment  therec  >f. 

The  payments  above  provided  for,  and  each  of  them,  must  be  made  to  the  party  of  the  first  part 
at  its  office  at  National  City,  in  the  county  of  San  Diego,  State  of  California. 

And  it  is  expressly  stipulated  and  agreed  that  time  is  of  the  essence  of  this  contract,  and  in  case 
of  the  party  of  the  second  part,  —  —  heirs,  executors,  or  assigns  shall  fail  to  make  the  payments 
aforesaid,  or  any  of  them,  or  any  part  thereof,  at  the  times  and  place  above  specified,  then  this  con- 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWKETWATER    AND    SAN    .TACINTO    RIVERS.  387 

tract  (shall,  at  the  option  of  the  party  of  the  first  part,  be  and  l>eeome  entirely  null  and  void,  and  the 
party  of  the  first  part  shall  have  the  right  to  shut  off  and  cease  t«  deliver  said  water;  or  the  party  of 
the  first  part  may  at  its  option,  enforce  this  contract  by  action  to  collect  the  sums  due,  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  its  lien  therefor  upon  said  lands,  and  in  case  it  so  elects  to  enforce  this  contract  the  failure  to 
pay  any  of  the  sums  falling  due  for  saiil  water  right  or  any  part  thereof,  shall  render  the  whole  amount 
of  all  of  the  payments  therefor  immediately  due  and  collectible. 

It  is  further  stipulated  and  agreed  that  no  assignment  of  this  contract  shall  l>e  valid  except  the 
same  lie  made  with  the  conveyance  of,  and  to  the  owners  in  fee  simple  of,  said  real  estate,  and  that 
any  person  to  whom  this  contract  is  assigned,  or  said  real  estate  and  water  right  conveyed,  his  or  her 
heirs  and  assigns  shall  become  personally  liable  to  pay  the  amounts  agreed  by  this  contract  to  be  paid. 

And  any  assignment  or  conveyance  of  this  contract  or  the  water  right  herein  sold,  to  any  person 
not  the  owner  in  fee  simple  of  said  real  estate,  shall  be  absolutely  void,  and  any  such  assignment  or 
conveyance  shall  forfeit  all  rights  under  this  contract;  and  the  party  of  the  first  part  may,  immediately, 
shut  off  and  cease  to  furnish  water  under  this  agreement. 

In  witness  whereof  the  parties  have  hereunto  set  their  hands  and  seals  this day  of , 

18—. 

This  form  of  contract  was  satisfactory  to  all  parties  concerned,  until  its  validity 
was  brought  in  question  by  the  decision  of  the  United  States  circuit  court,  referred  to 
in  the  chapter  on  litigation.  Since  that  decision  was  rendered  no  further  water  rights 
have  been  sold. 

The  rates  for  the  sale  or  delivery  of  water  are  fixed  by  the  city  council  of 
National  City,  and  specify  in  detail  the  various  uses  of  domestic  water  supply  and 
the  rate  for  each,  which  are  about  the  same  as  the  average  rates  in  cities  and  towns. 
In  addition  to  these  rates,  the  ordinance  provides  an  irrigation  rate,  to  be  applied  to 
all  tracts  over  2£  acres  in  area,  of  $3.50  per  acre  per  annum,  based  on  a  maximum 
use  of  850,000  gallons  (1.07  acre-feet  per  acre),  with  meter  rates  of  1  cent  per  1,000 
gallons  for  water  so  used.  The  meter  rates  for  domestic  water  are  30  cents  per  1,000 
gallons. 

Practically  the  same  rates  are  collected  outside  of  National  City,  in  the  remainder 
of  the  system,  although  as  heretofore  stated  the  company  has  been  endeavoring  to 
enforce  the  collection  of  higher  rates  on  the  ground  that  the  old  rates  did  not  afford 
any  adequate  return  upon  the  capital  invested.  These  higher  rates  are  resisted  by 
the  consumers,  and  the  United  States  circuit  court  and  the  United  States  Supreme 
Court  sustain  the  company  in  the  contention  that  they  should  have  adequate  rates,  but 
leave  the  company  in  the  hands  of  the  supervisors,  who  have  confirmed  the  old  rates, 
which  the  company  are  again  contesting  in  the  courts  in  a  suit  to  set  aside  the  ordi- 
nance of  the  supervisors. 

The  application  for  water  made  to  the  company  by  the  consumer  is  written 
out  on  blank  forms,  reciting  the  rate  to  be  paid  for  each  class  of  domestic  service 
and  for  irrigation,  describing  the  land  and  the  location  of  the  tap.  This  application 
constitutes  a  contract  and  a  promise  to  pay  the  rate  so  designated  quarterly  in 
advance.  The  company  also  issues  a  book  of  rules  and  regulations  governing  the 
water  supply,  of  which  rule  No.  1  states  that  "the  following  regulations  shall  be 
considered  a  part  of  the  contract  with  every  person  who  takes  water,"  etc.  These 
rules  are  17  in  number,  and  lay  down  certain  stipulations  regarding  the  mutual 
relations  of  the  company  and  the  consumer,  which  could  not  so  well  be  expressed  in 
the  contract. 


388  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

THE  FIXING  OF  WATER  BATES. 

The  constitution  of  California  contains  a  provision  requiring  that  water  rates 
shall  be  fixed  annually  in  the  month  of  February  of  each  year  by  the  city  councils 
or  boards  of  trustees  for  cities  and  towns,  or  by  the  county  boards  of  supervisors, 
for  water  systems  that  are  not  within  corporate  limits  of  cities  or  towns.  This 
provision  has  worked  a  great  hardship  upon  companies  supplying  water  and  caused 
them  to  suffer  such  loss  from  the  construction  of  the  law  as  to  render  it  impossible1 
for  them  to  realize  any  profit.  The  effect  has  been  to  exclude  capital  from  invest- 
ment in  the  development  of  water  systems,  and  to  set  up  a  constant  war  against 
capital  invested  in  this  veiy  necessary  class  of  public  improvements,  which  is  adverse 
to  the  general  welfare  of  the  State  and  seriously  retards  its  growth. 

The  law  would  be  a  satisfactory  one  if  a  proper  basis  were  established  to  bind 
and  control  those  who  adjudicate  the  matter,  either  the  bodies  who  have  the  power 
to  fix  the  rates  or  the  courts  who  have  the  power  to  review  the  action  of  the  city 
councils  or  county  supervisors.  It  has  been  suggested  that  there  should  be  a  State 
board  intrusted  with  judicial  power  for  the  fixing  of  water  rates,  to  hear  testimony 
in  all  cases,  and  decide  as  between  the  water  purveyors  and  the  consumers;  this  board 
to  take  cognizance  of  all  local  conditions  and  adopt  some  equitable  basis  of  more  or 
less  uniform  application.  The  first  step  to  be  settled  by  such  a  board  would  be  the 
basis  for  determining  the  value  of  the  plant.  In  arriving  at  the  value  of  the  plant, 
the  courts  have  laid  down  the  rule  that  the  cost  is  but  one  element  of  the  value. 
Other  considerations  must  be  taken  into  account,  such  as  the  value  of  the  franchise 
for  distributing  a  needed  commodity,  the  strategic  position  which  the  plant  occupies, 
and  its  importance  to  the  community  supplied  by  it.  The  board  should  determine 
how  depreciation  shall  be  allowed  for  and  determine  whether  the  rates  should  be 
sufficient  to  cover  a  sinking  fund  for  the  reproduction  of  the  perishable  parts  of  a 
plant  within  a  given  period,  or  whether  the  rates  shall  be  increased  from  time  to  time 
sufficiently  to  raise  funds  for  replacing  worn-out  portions  of  the  plant  at  the  time 
the  expenditure  is  necessary,  which  latter  method  would  result  in  a  widely  varying 
rate  from  year  to  year.  The  constitution  fixes  a  very  wide  latitude  of  net  income  to 
which  the  water  companies  are  entitled  over  and  above  operating  expenses  of  from  6 
per  cent  to  18  per  cent  per  annum.  This  may  have  been  intended  by  the  framers  of 
the  constitution  to  provide  for  a  fund  to  cover  depreciation,  but  if  this  is  the  case  it 
fails  to  do  so  satisfactorily.  If  a  definite  maximum  rate  of  interest  of  6  per  cent 
were  fixed  in  addition  to  depreciation  and  operating  expenses,  it  would  be  reasonable 
and  fair  to  all  parties  concerned.  This  would  remove  all  possibility  of  controversy, 
and  the  board,  after  having  determined  the  value  of  the  plant  and  the  probable  ratio 
of  depreciation,  would  then  only  have  to  decide  what  the  reasonable  expense  of 
operation  should  be  to  determine  the  rates  required. 

Such  a  commission,  or  board  of  control,  should  have  authority  to  decide  in 
advance  of  the  construction  of  an  irrigation  system  dependent  for  its  supply  upon 
storage  reservoirs,  as  to  what  would  be  a  reasonable  provision  in  the  way  of  storage 
for  dry  seasons,  and  what  proportion  of  the  total  capacity  of  the  reservoir  could 
safely  be  distributed  for  irrigation  each  year,  and  from  this  and  other  data  they 
should  determine  the  value  of  the  water  rights  to  be  charged  to  the  lands  for 
irrigation  service. 


WATEE    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JAC1NTO    RIVERS.  389 

HEMET    CREEK. 

The  stream  issuing  from  Ilemet  Valley  in  the  San  Jacinto  Mountains  is  locally 
known  as  Hemet  Creek  or  South  Fork  of  San  Jacinto  River.  It  drains  an  area 
above  Hemet  Dam  of  <ii>  square  miles  of  rugged  mountain  watershed,  from  4,300  to 
!»,000  feet  in  elevation,  and  has  in  ordinary  seasons  a  minimum  flow  of  about  200 
miner's  inches,  or  4  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  watershed  is  fairly  well  clothed  with 
forest  trees  of  pine  and  oak.  and  the  mountain  sides  are  generally  covered  with  dense 
underbrush  where  the  forest  trees  are  not  in  evidence.  The  stream  is  the  largest  of 
the  three  principal  tributaries  that  unite  before  issuing  from  the  mountains  to  form 
San  Jacinto  River.  The  entire  watershed  area  of  the  river  above  the  mouth  of  the 
canyon  is  143  square  miles,  and  the  proportion  intercepted  by  the  Hemet  Dam  is 
therefore  45  per  cent  of  the  whole.  The  San  Jacinto  is  a  typical  southern  California 
torrent,  deserving  of  the  name  of  river  only  at  certain  rare  intervals  when  seasons 
of  heavy  rainfall  produce  a. run  off  of  such  volume  as  to  enable  it  to  fill  two  large 
lakes  which  lie  along  its  source,  and  which  when  tilled  finally  overflow  and  seek  an 
outlet  to  the  sea  by  joining  the  Santa  Ana  River  at  Rincon,  below  South  Riverside. 
The  first  of  these  lakes  is  located  in  the  great  San  Jacinto  Valley,  about  15  miles 
northwest  from  the  mouth  of  the  canyon,  and  is  a  broad,  shallow  lagoon  of  large 
capacity.  Before  reaching  this  pond  the  river  must  traverse  a  broad,  porous  bed  of 
sand  and  gravel  which  is  capacious  enough  to  swallow  up  a  very  considerable  stream. 
In  ordinary  seasons  the  river  does  not  reach  all  the  way  to  the  lagoon  before  being 
absorbed  in  these  thirsty  gravel  beds.  When  the  seasons  are  wetter  the  river  may 
reach  the  lagoon  and  fill  it  partially  or  wholly.  Any  water  overflowing  the  lagoon 
must  then  pass  southwesterly  across  the  San  Jacinto  Valley  on  a  very  flat  slope, 
filling  more  gravel  beds  on  the  way,  and  thence  through  a  rocky  canyon  to  Elsinore 
Lake,  a  total  distance  of  25  miles  in  an  air  line  from  the  lagoon,  or  about  40  miles  by 
the  channel.  If  the  season  is  extremely  wet  the  run  off  may  suffice  to  till  the  lake  and 
overflow  to  the  Santa  Ana,  a  further  distance  of  25  miles,  and  thus  make  a  continuous 
connection  from  the  mountains  to  the  sea;  but  this  occurs  at  such  rare  intervals  as  to 
be  phenomenal  whenever  it  does  happen. 

The  fluctuating  character  of  the  stream  has  rendered  it  of  little  value  as  a  source 
of  supply  for  irrigation,  prior  to  the  construction  of  the  Hemet  Dam  in  1890-1895. 
The  only  diversions  from  the  main  river  below  the  mouth  of  Hemet  Creek,  prior  to 
the  commencement  of  construction  of  the  dam  were  an  8-inch  steel  pipe  line,  carrying 
water  to  the  Florida  tract,  a  ditch  with  a  capacity  of  about  3  to  4  cubic  feet  per 
second  supplying  a  farm  nearest  to  the  mouth  of  the  canyon,  and  a  few  flood-water 
ditches  down  the  stream  above  the  lagoon  for  meadow  irrigation,  which  received  a 
precarious  and  uncertain  supply. 

No  diversions  had  ever  been  made  of  Hemet  Creek  proper,  the  stream  to  which 
my  inquiries  were  confined  by  my  instructions,  before  the  building  of  the  dam. 
Hemet  Valley  above  the  dam  is  a  frosty  region  where  crops  can  not  be  profitably 
raised  on  account  of  climatic  severity,  and  hence  it  is  devoted  to  grazing.  The  outlet 
to  the  valley  is  a  narrow,  rocky  gorge  some  9  miles  long,  cut  in  granite,  in  which  the 
stream  plunges  down  a  descent  of  2,000  feet  before  uniting  with  Strawberry  Fork. 
The  masonry  dam  is  at  the  head  of  this  gorge,  and  water  from  the  reservoir  is 


390  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

released  into  the  canyon  and  picked  up  again  at  its  mouth  in  a  flume,  which  conveys 
it  down  the  main  canyon  3. 5  miles,  to  the  San  Jacinto  Valley. 

CLAIMS  TO  WATER  ON  HEMET  CREEK. 

All  the  filings  which  have  ever  been  made  to  water  in  Hemet  Creek  were 
evidentl}'  made  solely  for  the  supply  of  a  reservoir  to  ho  located  at  the  site  of  the 
existing  reservoir.  The  dam  site  was  so  narrow  and  so  striking  in  its  natural 
excellence  as  a  location  for  a  masonry  dam  that  it  attracted  general  notice,  and 
various  parties  looked  at  it  with  a  view  to  building  a  dam  before  the  structure  was 
finally  decided  upon  by  capitalists  able  to  build  it. 

The  filings  shown  by  the  records  of  San  Diego  County  on  this  stream  are 
enumerated  as  follows: 

No.  1.  November  8,  1884,  Charles  H.  Thomas  and  L.  M.  Wilson  filed  a  claim  to  "all  the  water 
of  the  San  Jacinto  River,"  at  a  point  described  as  "6  miles  westerly  from  Charles  Thomas's  house." 

No.  2.  July  24,  1885,  G.  D.  Compton  and  James  Kerr  filed  a  claim  to  a  reservoir  site  "about  4 
mile<  westerly  from  Charles  Thomas's  residence,"  but  they  did  not  specify  any  definite  amount  of 
water  claimed. 

No.  3.  December  20,  1885,  Leon  H.  Taylor  filed  a  claim  to  "2,000  inches,  measured  under  a 
4-inch  pressure,  for  domestic  and  agricultural  purposes,"  the  point  of  diversion  being  "sec.  8,  T.  6  S., 
R.  3  E.,  at  west  end  of  Hemet  Valley." 

No.  4.  December  14,  1885,  James  S.  Grain  filed  on  a  reservoir  site  at  sec.  7,  T.  6  S.,  R.  3  E., 
"said  reservoir  to  be  used  for  holding  and  storing  water,  and  said  water  to  lie  conveyed  to  San  Jacinto 
and  Pleasant  valleys  by  means  of  pipes,  flumes,  and  ditches,  and  to  be  used  in  irrigating  lands  in  the 
above-named  valleys,  and  for  conveying  wood,  lumber,  fence  posts,  and  all  kinds  of  building  material 
to  San  Jacinto  and  Pleasant  valleys,  and  also  for  mining,  milling,  manufacturing,  and  domestic  pur- 
poses." No  volume  of  water  is  specified. 

No.  5.  April  13,  1886,  L.  M.  Wilson  and  James  S.  Grain  filed  on  a  reservoir  site,  located  3  miles 
west  of  filing  No.  4  above.  No  volume  of  water  is  named  in  the  filing. 

No.  6.  October  7,  1886,  John  McBride,  James  S.  Rainey,  and  John  S.  Grain  filed  a  notice  relo- 
cating and  claiming  the  location  as  a  reservoir  dam  site,  described  as  being  "situated  at  the  westerly 
end  of  Hemet  Valley,  and  about  3.5  miles  in  a  westerly  direction  from  the  residence  of  Charles 
Thomas."  The  volume  of  water  claimed  is  "all  of  the  surplus  water  at  this  point  of  location  which 
can  be  held  in  reserve  by  a  dam  50  feet  high,  or  75  feet  high,  or  100  feet  high,  or  110  feet  high." 

No.  7.  December  7,  1886,  James  R.  Cheathem  filed  on  the  reservoir  dam  site  at  the  westerly  end 
of  Hemet  Valley,  "on  account  of  all  the  previous  locators  having  failed  to  comply  with  the  laws 
governing  the  location  and  holding  of  reservoir  dam  sites." 

No.  8.  September  30,  1890,  the  Lake  Hemet  Water  Company  filed  a  notice  claiming  the  water 
flowing  to  the  extent  of  200  inches,  measured  under  a  4-inch  pressure,  at  a  point  described  as  500  feet 
northwesterly  from  the  SE.  corner  of  NE.  J  sec.  8,  T.  6  S.,  R.  3  E.,  which  point  is  about  1.5  miles  above 
the  site  of  the  Hemet  Dam.  From  about  this  point  the  company  subsequently  built  a  ditch  and  flume 
leading  to  the  dam,  conveying  about  100  inches  of  water,  which  was  used  for  power  during  the  building 
of  the  dam. 

No.  9.  September  30,  1890,  the  Lake  Hemet  Water  Company  filed  a  notice  claiming  100  miner's 
inches  of  water  flowing  in  Herke  Creek,  a  tributary  of  Hemet  Creek,  the  point  of  diversions  as  described 
being  but  450  feet  from  the  location  of  claim  No.  8. 

No.  10.  June  30,  1891,  the  Lake  Hemet  Water  Company  filed  a  notice  claiming  "the  water  flow- 
ing in  the  San  Jacinto  River  at  the  point  of  diversion,  to  wit,  in  the  NW.  J  of  sec.  28,  T.  5  S.,  R.  2  E., 
S.  B.  M.,  just  above  the  mouth  of  Strawberry  Fork,  to  the  extent  of  4,000  inches,  measured  under  a 
4-inch  pressure,  to  be  used  for  agriculture,  domestic,  mechanical,  and  mining  purposes,"  etc. 

These  are  all  the  claims  to  water  of  record  in  the  recorder's  office  of  San  Diego 
Countv  referring  to  Hemet  Creek,  and  there  are  no  claims  on  file  in  the  records  of 


WATEK    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS. 


891 


Riverside  County  claiming  the  \v:iters  of  that  stream.  Riverside  County  was  formed 
in  IS! »;">,  and  all  the  watershed  area  and  the  lands  irrigated  from  the  stream  are  now  in 
that  county,  and  while  an  enormous  quantity  of  water  has  been  filed  upon  from  the 
.stream  below  the  junction  of  llemet  ('reek,  no  filings  have  been  made  of  the  waters 
ol  that  branch  of  the  river. 

The  Hemet  Dam  successfully  impounds  all  the  waters  that  have  come  down  to  it 
since  its  completion  in  1895,  and  therefore  actually  appropriates  the  water,  although 
it  will  i>e  observed  by  reading  the  list  of  filings  that  no  claim  to  water  for  the  reser- 
voir itself  has  been  made  by  the  Lake  Hemet  Water  Company,  the  owners  of  the 
dam,  and  their  only  filing  for  any  amount  anywhere  approximating  the  capacity  of 
the  reservoir  is  for  4,000  inches,  located  at  the  diverting  dam,  9  miles  below  the 
reservoir. 

THE  HEMET  DAM. 

This  structure  was  planned  by  the  writer  for  a  possible  height  of  160  feet  above 
the  stream  bed,  and  the  profile  built  up  to  the  height  of  110  feet  is  of  a  section 
designed  to  carry  the  full  ultimate  height.  At  that  level  of  110  feet  the  thickness 
is  30  feet.  An  offset  of  20  feet  was  here  made,  and  the  wall  carried  up  to  122.5 
feet,  with  a  crest  10  feet  wide.  The  height  above  lowest  foundation  is  135  feet;  the 
thickness  at  base,  100  feet;  top  length,  246  feet;  base  length,  30  feet.  It  is  arched 
upstream  with  a  radius  of  225.4  feet,  and  is  bffilt  of  granite  rubble  laid  in  Portland 
ccim-nt  concrete,  the  contents  being  31,105  cubic  yards. 

The  capacity  of  the  reservoir  is  as  follows: 

Capacity  of  Hemet  Lake. 


Height 
above  base 
of  dam. 

Surface 
area. 

Capacity. 

Feet. 

Acres. 

Acre-feet. 

40 

2 

33 

(1  45 

2.3 

73 

50 

3 

113 

60 

29 

332 

70 

62 

773 

80 

103 

1,603 

90 

133 

2,787 

100 

187 

4,391 

110 

252 

6,598 

120 

328 

9,512 

6122.5 

366 

10,500 

a  Lowest  outlet. 


6  Top  of  dam. 


The  reservoir  has  never  been  entirely  filled  since  its  completion  to  its  present 
height,  October  9, 1895,  although  when  it  had  reached  a  height  of  107  feet  there  came 
a  flood,  January  9,  1893,  which  filled  the  reservoir  and  poured  over  the  top  of  the 
dam  to  a  depth  of  several  feet.  The  record  of  subsequent  inflow  and  draft  has  been 
so  imperfectly  kept  that  no  reliable  estimate  can  be  made  of  the  actual  run  off  from 
the  watershed  during  the  past  five  years.  At  the  high  elevation  at  which  the  reser- 
voir and  its  watershed  lie,  the  run  off  should  be  sufficient  to  fill  the  reservoir  with 


392  IRRIGATION   INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

certainty  every  year,  as  it  requires  but  an  average  depth  of  run  off  of  3  inches  over 
the  watershed  to  do  it.  Inasmuch  as  the  reservoir  has  not  tilled  in  any  year  since 
1895,  it  is  an  evidence  of  the  paucity  of  precipitation  and  the  severity  of  the  protracted 

drought  which  has  prevailed  in  southern  California  in  all  that  period. 

• 
THE  IBBIGATED  LANDS. 

The  Hemet  Dam  was  built  by  the  Lake  Hemet  Water  Company  for  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  supplying  a  tract  of  7,000  acres  belonging  to  the  Hemet  Land  Company  and 
the  three  or  four  individual  stockholders.  The  water  is  conveyed  to  this  tract  from 
the  diverting  dam  at  the  mouth  of  Hemet  Creek,  or  South  Fork,  through  3.5  miles  of 
flume,  discharging  at  the  mouth  of  the  main  canyon  of  the  river  into  a  box  at  the 
head  of  a  22-inch  riveted  steel  pipe  2  miles  long.  This  pipe  carries  the  water  across 
the  channel  of  ths  river  and  out  upon  a  mesa  to  a  measuring  box,  which  discharges 
into  a  masonry-lined  open  canal  and  Hume  5  miles  in  length,  that  in  turn  empties 
into  a  10-acre  distributing  reservoir.  From  this  reservoir  the  distribution  through 
the  tract  is  made  by  small,  lined  ditches  and  flumes,  of  which  there  are  more  than  .'in 
miles  in  all,  covering  the  entire  tract. 

Water  is  also  delivered  under  pressure  from  the  reservoir  to  the  town  of  Hemet . 
passing  through  a  filtering  or  straining  apparatus  to  clarify  it  and  take  out  all  vege- 
table matter.  The  tract  is  subdivided  into  smaller  tracts  of  5  to  20  acres,  a  consider- 
able number  of  which  have  been  sold  to  farmers  residing  upon  them.  These  tracts 
are  chiefly  planted  to  deciduous  fruits — apricots,  peaches,  [tears,  nectarines,  prunes, 
and  figs,  all  of  which  thrive  in  the  rich,  mellow  soil  of  that  section.  The  elevation  of 
the  tract  is  all  above  1,600  feet  and  is  not  adapted  to  citrus  fruits.  The  area  actually 
irrigated  is  about  1,200  acres,  and  the  duty  of  water  or  the  volume  required  annuallv  is 
from  1.5  to  2  feet  in  depth,  or  1.5  to  2  acre-feet  of  water  per  acre  of  land. 

WATER-RIGHT  CONTRACTS. 

All  of  the  land  under  the  system  is  sold  with  a  clause  in  the  deeds  apportioning 
"one-eighth  of  1  miner's  inch  of  perpetual  flow  of  water  from  April  15  to  November 
15  of  each  year  for  each  acre."  This  would  be  equivalent  to  1.06  acre-feet  of  water 
per  acre,  which  has  been  found  insufficient  for  satisfactory  irrigation.  The  rates 
charged  for  water  are  f 2  per  acre  per  annum,'  with  an  additional  charge  of  $1  per 
acre  for  each  service  of  a  tract  during  the  nonirrigating  season,  which  is  stipulated 
to  be  from  November  10  to  April  10. 

There  has  been  no  litigation  between  rival  claimants  to  the  water  of  the  stream, 
and  none  over  the  rates  at  which  the  water  is  sold. 

GENERAL  CONCLUSIONS. 

The  investigation  of  this  subject  has  impressed  the  writer  with  the  fact  that  the 
present  method  of  tiling  and  recording  claims  to  water  under  the  laws  of  this  State 
is  extremely  unsatisfactory,  indeterminate,  and  unbusinesslike,  leading  to  endless 
litigation  and  confusion.  The  system  should  be  replaced  by  something  more  intelli- 
gent, positive,  and  rational.  Filings  and  claims  to  water  should  be  reduced  to  actual 
title,  as  clear  and  unassailable  as  titles  to  land.  This  can  be  accomplished  only  I)}7 


WATKH    STOKAdK    OX    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    JACINTO    RIVERS.  393 

and  through  Stale  control,  and  the  establishment  of  a  central  office  of  record,  under 
a  State  bureau,  empowered  to  adjudicate  all  claims  to  water.  This  State  board  should 
be  a  permanent  commission,  like  the  State  board  of  health  of  Massachusetts,  who 
would  appoint  a  Slate  engineer,  in  whose  office  all  claims  shor.ld  be  filed.  There 
should  be  in  this  office  two  sets  of  records,  the  first  of  which  should  be  in  the  nature 
of  a  preliminary  or  probationary  filing.  -All  claims  of  whatever  character  should  be 
received  and  recorded  in  the  probationary  record  in  the  order  of  their  receipt,  all 
claims  upon  any  stream  or  its  tributaries  being  arranged  systematically  together. 
Prior  to  transferring  any  claim  into  the  second  or  permanent  record  it  should  be  passed 
upon  by  the  board,  who  should  require  the  claimant  to  prove  conclusively,  at  his 
own  expense.  (1)  that  there  was  water  available  for  appropriation  and  that  there 
were  no  prior  claims  in  conflict;  (2)  that  there  existed  a  requirement  for  the  water 
proposed  to  be  appropriated,  and  (3)  that  the  claimant  had  the  ability,  financially 
or  otherwise,  to  properly  utilize  the  water.  In  case  of  a  conflict,  the  board  should 
summon  all  prior  claimants  to  prove  their  rights,  and  on  hearing  of  testimony  enter 
a  final  decree  upon  the  permanent  record  establishing  these  rights.  The  State 
engineer  should  establish  permanent  gaging  stations  on  all  streams  and  maintain 
such  a  system  of  measurements  as  will  determine  the  minimum,  maximum,  and 
average  volume  of  water  supply  available  for  appropriation  and  use.  The  board 
of  control  would  have  to  be  endowed  w'th  judicial  powers,  and  their  adjudication 
of  rights  should  be  final,  subject  only  to  review  by  the  supreme  court  of  the  State. 

The  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  is  wholly  inapplicable  to  the  torrential  streams 
of  the  State,  whose  waters  should  be  subject  to  appropriation  by  impounding  reser- 
voirs unhampered  by  the  assertion  of  this  right.  It  has  been  shown  in  the  two  casqs 
cited  that  riparian  owners  stand  ready  to  invoke  the  law  to  destroy  any  impounding 
dam,  no  matter  how  costly  or  necessary  to  the  welfare  of  the  public,  to  satisfy  a 
fancied  injury  to  water  rights  on  streams  that  are  dry  a  large  portion  of  each  year, 
and  of  no  practical  utility  to  these  riparian  owners  or  anyone  else  without  storage 
reservoirs.  The  law  of  riparian  rights  should  be  modified  to  exclude  interference 
with  impounding  reservoirs  of  superior  public  utility  to  the  greater  number  of  the 
people. 

The  fullest  conservation  and  use  of  water  in  torrential  streams  can  be  brought 
about  only  by  storage,  and  as  a  preliminary  step  all  storage  possibilities  should  be 
intelligently  studied  on  all  the  streams  of  the  State  by  the  State  engineer,  under 
the  direction  of  the  State  board  of  control.  This  involves  an  extended  water  survey 
of  the  State  and  all  the  available  reservoir  sites  within  its  limits.  In  this  survey  many 
reservoir  sites  and  storage  enterprises  will  be  discovered  of  such  magnitude  as  to  be 
feasible  of  construction  only  by  the  National  Government.  These  will,  in  most  cases, 
be  located  on  Government  land,  and  will  store  water  for  the  irrigation"  of  a  portion 
of  the  public  domain  only.  Such  enterprises  should  properly  be  undertaken  by 
the  National  Government,  and  the  water  supply  thus  conserved  be  turned  over  to  the 
State  board  of  control  .for  its  proper  distribution  to  the  consumers. 

In  pursuance  of  the  foregoing  conclusions,  I  respectfully  submit  the  following 
recommendations : 

(1)  There  should  be  created  in  California  a  special  tribunal,  entitled  "The  board 
of  control  of  waters,"  who  shall  have  the  determination  of  existing  water  rights 


394  IRRIGATION     INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

and  the  control  of  the  establishment  of  rights  hereafter.  This  board  should  consist 
of  one  attorney,  one  business  man.  and  one  civil  engineer,  all  of  good  character  and 
established  reputation,  to  be  selected  and  appointed  by  the  supreme  court  of  the 
State,  and  to  hold  office  until  removed  for  cause.  The  salary  of  the  members  of 
this  board  should  not  he  less  than  $3,000  per  annum  each,  and  it  should  be  allowed 
a  clerk  at  a  salary  oT  $1.800  per  annum,  to' be  appointed  by  it. 

('2)  There  should  be  an  executive  officer  of  the  board,  appointed  by  it,  who 
should  be  a  competent,  experienced  civil  engineer,  and  have  supreme  control  over 
the  administration  of  the  water  supply  and  its  distribution  to  the  parties  entitled  to 
its  use.  The  title  of  the  officer  should  be  "State  hydraulic  engineer." 

(3)  The  State- legislature  should  by  statute  declare  that  the  common-law  doctrine 
of  riparian  rights  is  inapplicable  to  the  prevailing  conditions  in  California,  except  so 
far  as  to  make  riparian  owners  on  streams  preferred  users  of  the  natural  stream 
flow  for  domestic  and  stock  purposes. 

(4)  The  statutes  of  California  passed  for  the  government  of  the  appropriation 
of  streams  should  declare  that  all  unappropriated  waters  not  utilized  for  irrigation 
at  the  date  of  the  passage  of  the  act,  either  by  canals  or  reservoirs,  are  public  prop- 
erty, and  all  irrigation  rights  to  be  established  hereafter  shall  be  attached  to  the  land 
for  which  the  appropriation  is  made.     The  volume  permitted  to  be  appropriated 
should  in  all  cases  be,  limited  to  the  actual  necessities  of  economical  use.  to  be  deter- 
mined from  time  to  time  by  the  State  hydraulic  engineer.     Priority  of  use  should 
give  the  better  right  as  between  parties  using  water  for  the  same  purpose. 

(5)  There  should  be  entire  harmony  and  cooperation  between  the   State   and 
National  governments,  looking  to  the  fullest  possible  use  of  the  waters  of  the  State 
for  irrigation,  particularly  in  all  cases  where  the  diversion  of  water  from  the  streams 
may  tend  to  render  navigable  streams  nonnavigable.     To  accomplish  this  purpose 
the  National  Government  should  take  measures  for  canalizing  the  rivers  and  make 
slack-water  navigation  on  the  streams,  thus  giving  maximum  navigability  with  min- 
imum use  of  water.     A  wise  adjustment  and  determination  of  the  volume  which  can 
be  safely  taken  from  the  tributaries  of  navigable  streams  for  irrigation  without 
interfering  with  slack-water  navigation  should  be  urged  upon  the  National  Govern- 
ment as  an  urgent  necessity. 

(6)  The  work  of  the  National  Government  in  promoting  irrigation  development, 
in  addition  to  the  improvement  of  navigation,  should  also  include  the  fullest  pro- 
tection of  the  forests,  construction  of  storage  reservoirs  for  impounding  water  to 
be  used  on  the  public  lands,  and  a  continuation  of  the  hydrographic  and  topographic 
work  of  the  U.  S.  Geological  Survey  and  the  work  of  the  U.  S.  Department  of 
Agriculture  for  the  promotion  of  improved  economic  methods  of  irrigation. 

(7)  National  aid  in  constructing  storage  works  to  be  chiefly  used  for  private  lands 
should  be  discouraged,  although  cases  might  occur  where  reservoirs  built  to  serve 
public  lands  would  also  be  serviceable  to  adjacent  lands  in  private  ownership  that 
had  once  been  owned  by  the  United  States.     In  such  cases  the  use  of  reservoired 
water  for  private  lands  should  not  be  prohibited. 

(8)  The  use  of  water  for  domestic  purposes  should  take  precedence  over  all  other 
uses.    The  use  of  water  for  the  production  of  power  applied  to  the  pumping  of  water 
for  domestic  purposes  and  irrigation  should  be  recognized  as  next  in  right.    In  those 


WATER    STORAGE    ON    SWEETWATER    AND    SAN    .TACINTO    RIVERS.  395 

sections  of  the  State  where  mining  is  the  prevailing  industry,  mining  rights  to  water 
should  also  take  preference  over  all  other  uses,  domestic  use  alone  excepted. 

(!>)  The  governor  of  the  State  should  be  asked  to  appoint  an  expert  nonpartisan 
commission  to  frame  an  irrigation  law  or  laws  which  should  fit  and  adapt  the  fore- 
going recommendations  to  the  State  constitution,  and  present  the  results  in  the  form 
that  they  should  be  passed  by  the  State  legislature. 

(10)  The  State  board  of  control  should  be  intrusted  with  the  power  and  duty  of 
fixing  equitable  rates  for  the  sale  of  water  for  irrigation  by  private  reservoir  and 
canal  companies,  as  well  as  for  the  sale  of  water  rights. 


RECOMMENDATIONS  OF  SPECIAL  AGENTS  AND  EXPERTS. 

As  has  already  been  stated,  each  expert  in  charge  of  an  investigation 
has  based  his  conclusions  on  the  facts  gathered  in  his  particular  field,  and 
these  conclusions  are  made  a  part  of  his  individual  report. 

After  the  work  was  completed  a  conference  of  the  experts  was  held  at 
Berkeley,  which  showed  that  there  was  a  practical  unanimity  of  opinion 
among  them  regarding  the  more  important  measures  necessary  to  develop 
to  the  fullest  extent  the  agricultural  possibilities  of  California.  The  con- 
clusions they  reached  and  their  recommendations  are  given  below. 

It  is  the  duty  of  the  State: 

(1)  To  fix  the  priority  and  limitations  of  every  existing  right  to  water, 
whether  based  OB  the  ownership  of  riparian  lands  or  on  beneficial  use. 

(2)  To  determine  the  volume  of  unused  or  unappropriated  waters. 

(3)  To  declare  unappropriated  water  State  property  and  define   the 
procedure  whereby  rights  thereto  may  be  acquired. 

(4)  To  exercise  adequate  supervision  and  control  when  new  appropria- 
tions are  sought. 

(5)  To  provide  an  office  in  which  shall  be  kept  a  complete  record  of 
each  perfected  right,  of  each  application  and  of  each  permit  for  a  new 
diversion  or  use. 

(6)  To  divide  the  State  into  administrative  divisions  and  districts  based 
on  drainage  lines. 

(7)  To  provide  an  efficient  administrative  system  with  proper  officers 
for  the  distribution  of  the  water  supply  among  those  entitled  to  its  use. 

For  the  accomplishment  of  these  purposes  they  recommend  the  follow- 
ing legislation: 

BOARD  OF   CONTROL. 

(1)  There  should  be  created  in  California  a  special  tribunal  entitled 
"The  board  of  control  of  water,"  which  shall  have  the  determination  of 
existing  water  rights  and  the  control  of  the  establishment  of  rights  hereafter. 
This  board  shall  consist  of  one  attorney,  one  business  man,  and  one  civil 
engineer,  all  of  good  character  and  established  reputation,  to  be  selected 
and  appointed  by  the  supreme  court  of  the  State,  and  to  hold  office  until 

397 


398  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

removed  for  cause.  The  salary  of  the  members  of  this  board  should  not 
be  less  than  $3,000  per  annum  each,  and  they  should  be  allowed  a  clerk  at 
a  salary  of  $1,800  per  annum,  to  be  appointed  by  the  board. 

STATE   HYDRAULIC    ENGINEER. 

(2)  There  should  be  an  executive  officer  of  the  board,  appointed  by 
them,  who   should  be  a  competent,  experienced   civil  engineer,  and  who 
should  have  exclusive  control  over  the  administration  of  the  water  supply 
and  its  distribution  to  the  parties  having  legally  established  rights  to  its 
use.     The  title  of  this  officer  should  be  "State  hydraulic  engineer." 

UNAPPROPRIATED  WATERS  DECLARED  PUBLIC  PROPERTY. 

(3)  The  statutes  of  California  should  declare  that  all  unappropriated 
waters  not  utilized  for  irrigation  at  the  date  of  the  passage  of  the  act  are 

public  property. 

LIMITATION   ON   RIGHTS. 

« 

(4)  All  irrigation  rights  to  be  established  hereafter  shall  be  attached 
to  the  land  for  which  the  appropriation  is  made.     The  volume  permitted  to 
be  appropriated  should  in  all  cases  be  limited  to  the  actual  necessities,  of 
economical  use,  to  be  determined  from  time  to  time  by  the  State  hydraulic 
engineer.     Priority  of  use  should  give  the  better  right  as  between  parties 
using  water  for  the  same  purpose. 

DOMESTIC  USE  TO  BE  A  PREFERRED    RIGHT. 

(5)  Domestic  use  of  water  should  take  precedence  over  an  other  uses. 

ALL  RIGHTS  TO  BE  BASED  ON  USE. 

(6)  Beneficial  use  should  determine  the  extent  of  every  acquired  right 
to  water  as  well  as  of  the  riparian  owners  as  of  the  appropriators.     No 
riparian  owner  who  has  not  made  beneficial  use  of  his  water  should  acquire 
title  to  water  under  any  doctrine  as  against  those  who  have  put  water  to  a 
beneficial  use. 

BOARD  OF  CONTROL  TO  FIX  WATER  RATES. 

(7)  The  board  of  water  control  should  be  vested  with  the  authority  to 
fix  water  rates  now  possessed  by  county  supervisors,  city  councils,  or  boards 
of  trustees  of  municipalities. 


KKroMMKXD.VnoN'S    ()K    SPECIAL     A<1KNTS    AND    KXl'KRTS.  399 

RIGHT  OF  EMINENT  DOMAIN. 

(8)  The  right  of  eminent  domain  should  be  given  to  users  and  con- 
veyers of  water  for  irrigation. 

GOVERNOR  TO  APPOINT  A  COMMISSION  TO  FRAME  LAWS. 

(9)  The  governor  of  the  State  should  be  asked  to  appoint  an  expert 
nonpartisan  commission  to  frame  an  irrigation  law  or  laws,  which  should 
fit  and  adapt  the  foregoing  recommendations  to  the  State  constitution  and 
present  the  results  in  the  form  that  they  should  be  passed  by  the  State 
legislature. 

The  agents  and  experts  further  recommended — 

STATE  AID  TO  DISTRICTS. 

(10)  State  aid  should  be  extended— 

(a)  To  the  extent  of  projecting  and  supervising  works  whenever  con- 
structed for  an  organized  district.     Districts,  in  the  case  of  storage  works, 
should  include  all  irrigation  works  and  lands  that  will  be  benefited  by  the 
water  stored. 

(b)  To  the  extent  of   actual    construction    of  works  under  a  proper 
regulation  for  the  recovery  of  its  outlay  in  whole  or  ill  part  from  the  lands 
benefited  in  proportion  to  the  benefits  conferred. 

NATIONAL  AID. 

(11)  The  work  of  the  National  Government  in  promoting  irrigation 
development,  in  addition  to  the   improvement  of  navigation,  should  also 
include  the  construction  of  storage  reservoirs  for  impounding  water  to  be 
used  on  the  public  lands;   a  continuation  of  the  hydrographic  and  topo- 
graphic work  of  the  Geological  Survey,  and  of  the  work  of  the  Irrigation) 
Investigation  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  for  the  promotion  of  improved 
economic  methods  of  irrigation. 

COOPERATION    OF    STATE    AND    NATIONAL    GOVERNMENTS    WITH   ESPECIAL 
REFERENCE  TO  SACRAMENTO  AND  SAN  JOAQUIN  RIVERS. 

(12)  There  should  be  entire  harmony  and  cooperation  between  the 
State  and  National  Governments  looking  to  the  fullest  possible  use  of  the 
waters  of  the  State  for  irrigation,  particularly  in  all  cases  where  the  diversion 
of  water  from  streams  may  tend  to  reduce  their  navigability.     To  accom- 
plish this   purpose  the  National   Government  should  take   measures  for 
canalizing  these  rivers-,  thus  giving  maximum  navigability  with  minimum 


400  IRRIGATION    INVESTIGATIONS    IN    CALIFORNIA. 

use  of  water.  A  wise  adjustment  and  determination  of  flu-  volume  which 
can  be  safely  taken  from  the  tributaries  of  navigable  streams  for  irrigation 
without  interfering  with  slack-water  navigation  should  be  presented  to  the 
National  Government  as  an  urgent  necessity. 

FOREST  MANAGEMENT. 

(13)  Both  Federal'and  State  aid  should  extend  to  forest  preservation. 
Practically  all  timber  land  should  be  withdrawn  from  sale,  and  timber  should 
be  cut  under  regulation  at  fixed  charges  for  stumpage.     Revenue  from  the 
sale  of  timber  should  be  applied  to  betterments  and  extensions  of  the  forest 
areas  and  to  the  control  and  management  of  the  forests. 

NATIONAL  AID  FOR  PRIVATE  LAND  DISCOURAGED. 

(14)  National  aid  in  constructing  storage  works  to  be  chiefly  used  for 
private  lands  should  be   discouraged,  although   cases  might  occur  where 
reservoirs  built  to  serve  public  lands  would  also  be  serviceable  to  adjacent 
lands  in  private  ownership  that  had  been  once  owned  by  the  United  States. 
In  such  cases  the  use  of  reservoired  water  for  private  lands  should  not  be 
prohibited. 

RECLAMATION  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

(15)  Federal  aid,  for  the  present,  should  not  be  extended  to  actual 
construction  of  works,  except  when  the   lands,  or  a  large'  portion  of  the 
lands,  to  be  benefited  belong  to  the  public  domain.     The  price  at  which 
the  land  is  sold  should  be  increased  by  an  amount  sufficient  to  reimburse 
the  Government  for  its  outlay;  or  the  sale  can  be  supplemented  by  a  rate 
charge  or  tax  for  a  series  of  years  such  that  ultimately  the  funds  advanced 
in  the  construction  will,  in  the  main  at  least,  be  returned  to  the  National 
Treasury.     No  works  should  be  constructed  unless  the  benefits  conferred 
will  exceed  the  cost. 

Recommended  by:  WM.  E.  SMYTHK, 

MAKSDEN  MANSON, 
J.  M.  WILSON, 

,, 

FRANK  SOULE, 
C.  E.  GRUNSKY, 
C.  D.  MARX, 
E.  M.  BOGGS, 

J.   D.  SCHUYLER, 

Agents  and  Experts  in  Charge. 


INDEX. 


Page. 

Acknowledgments  of  assistance 6,6 

Adams  Ditch 179 

Adiiins,  Frank,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 5 

Adjudication  of  water  rights — 

a  public  matter I'M 

beneficial  use  basis  of,  Wyoming 106 

favorable  conditions  for 66 

Honey  Lake  Valley 94 

Kings  River 58,60 

present  method  unsatisfactory 128, 2.M,J-ril>. -»7 

should  be  left  to  administrative  board 256 

uncertainties  of 60 

Administration  of  irrigation  law,  State  should  pro- 
vide   190,191 

Administration  of  streams — 

Canada 57 

difficulties  of,  under  California  law 61 

need  of,  California !..  58,397 

Wyoming 55 

Agricultural  situation  in  California,  report  by  Elwood 

Mead 17 

Agriculture  in  California,  no  limit  to  profitable  exten- 
sion         28 

Alabama  Bar  Ditch 148 

Alfalfa,  value  of,  to  California 28 

Aliso  Canal 223 

Alta  Irrigation  District 59,27;V->Ut. '.Ill 

American  irrigation,  Australian  report  on,  quoted 89 

American  River- 
value  of  land  irrigated  from 27 

value  of  water  supplied  by 27 

American  River  Basin,  irrigation 130 

Appropriation  by  Congress  limited  to  irrigation 24 

Appropriation  law  of  California 81,228,269,272 

at  work 83 

discussion 36, 84, 103, 104, 119, 164, 274, 318, 323, 332, 347 

provisions 81,228,235,273,332 

Appropriation  rights  contrary  to  riparian  rights 46 

Appropriations  of  water 64, 80, 228 

abuse  of 48 

attached  to  land  irrigated 38, 40, 

41 , 49, 55, 106, 318, 323, 348, 349, 384. 394 

beginnings  of,  in  mining  customs 118 

for  sale,  rental,  or  distribution 38 

laxity  of  method 103 

limited  by  power  of  supervisors  to  fix  rates 106 

method  of,  prescribed  by  law 119 

nature  of 384 

necessity  for  public  protection 81, 318 

need  for  curtailment 54 

new  method  recommended 255 

uo  public  authority  over 81 

no  restriction  placed  on  amount 334 

notice  of,  not  necessary 197 


23856— No.  100—01 26 


Appropriations  of  water— Continued.  Page. 

permitted  by  California  statute 81 

permitted  by  United  States  statute 120 

protected  by  penal  la  ws 119 

provided  for  in  mining  laws 36 

public  authority  over,  Wyoming 104 

recording  of 58, 104 

128, 129, 164, 191, 197, 207, 255, 257, 270, 323, 331, 367, 377, 397 

regulation  of,  not  provided 335 

rights  of,  voided  by  nonuser 119 

State  should  regulate 189, 191, 323, 393, 397 

Arkansas  Flat  people,  litigation  affecting 58 

Arroyo  Seco,  claims  to  water 196, 197 

Artesian  water  supply 210 

Ashley,  P.  N.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 5 

Associated  colonies 100 

Attorneys  not  responsible  for  litigation 62 

Auburn — 

duty  of  water 135 

practice  of  irrigation 135 

Australia — 

riparian  rights  in  New  South  Wales 52 

riparian  rights  in  Victoria 51 

Australian  irrigation,  report  on,  quoted 39 

Balls  Canyon  Creek 75 

adjudications  of  water  rights 95 

water  supply,  estimate 75 

Balls  Canyon  Valley,  storage 78 

Batchelder  and  Adams  Canal 93 

Baxter  Creek- 
adjudication  of  water  rights 95 

claims  to  water 87,88 

watershed  — '. 77 

Bay  Counties  Power  Company 128,132,153 

Bear  River  Basin,  irrigation 130 

Bear  Valley  Reservoir ,-. 124, 140 

Beneficial  use  of  water- 
basis  of  adjudications  in  Wyoming 105 

should  be  limit  of  appropriations  .  41, 81, 119, 322, 394, 398 

State  should  define 189 

Bliss  Canal 260 

Bloomfield  Ditch 146, 147 

Blyth  Canal 224,247 

Board  of  control — 

recommended  for  California 112, 191, 

206, 254, 257, 321 , 347, 349, 393, 397 

Wyoming 55,104 

appeals  from,  seldom  taken 105 

composed  of  experts ; 106 

jurisdiction 65 

notajudicial  body 63 

Board  of  public  works,  recommended  for  California..      129 

IT?    M 
,    I,.   .M  . — 

field  of  investigations 5 

report  on  Los  Angeles  River 327 

401 


402 


INDEX. 


Bonanza  farming—  Page.    | 

compared  to  range  stock  business 32 

Sacramento  Valley 30 

Bowman  Lake  Reservoir 124, 145 

Hover  Ditch 149 

Boyer  Reservoir 151 

Browns  Valley  Irrigation  District — 

cost  of  raising  olives 137 

cost  of  raising  peaches 138 

cr.)].s  irrigated 132 

duty  of  water 132 

irrigated  lands 130 

irriga tion  season 135 

organization 131 

works,  description 131 

Buena  Vista  Lake,  evaporation  (note) 75 

Buggytown,  irrigation  situation 93 

Burrell  Ditch 307 

Butte  Creek,  owned  by  Stanford  estate 34 

Byrd  Ditch 285 

Cache  Creek- 
claims  to  water- 
discussion  170 

table 165 

contribution  for  investigation  on,  from  California 

Water  and  Forest  Association 6 

description 158 

duty  of  water 187 

flow 156,157 

irrigation 171 

litigation 176 

power 160,191 

reporton,  by  J.  M.  Wilson 155 

storage 171 

Cache  Creek  Valley- 
condition  and  possibilities 187 

products 161 

pumping  plants 183 

soil 160 

waterrates 76 

wheat  growing 163 

winter  irrigation 174 

Cacheville  Agricultural  Ditch  Company 176 

Calamity  Ditch 312 

California- 
agricultural  situation  in,  report  by  Elwood  Mead. .  17 

area  of  irrigated  land - 19 

climate  favorable  to  agriculture 17 

compared  with  Egypt  and  Italy 29 

compared  with  Utah  ..., 31 

early  water  laws * 216 

irrigation  laws — 

reform  of,  needed 103 

reform  of,  a  State  matter 20 

irrigation  not  everywhere  a  necessity 17 

northern,  irrigation  in 26 

problem  of 18 

products 17,217 

southern- 
dependent  on  irrigation 26 

irrigation  in 25 

returns  from  citrus  fruits 25, 26 

value  of  irrigated  land 25 

value  of  irrigation  water 25 

value  of  land  and  water 19,20 

California  Water  and  Forest  Association,  financial  aid 

extended  by 19 

Camanetti  act,  hydraulic  mining  resumed  under 127 


1'age. 
Cameron  Ditch 284 

Canada,  riparian  rights 49 

Canal  management 318 

Cliche  Creek 173,174 

ordinance  regarding 176 

cost  of— 

Alta  Irrigation  District 2% 

Calamity  Ditch 312 

Carmelita  Ditch 297 

Ccnterville  and  Kingsburg  Canal 291 

Crescent  Canal 311 

Emigrant  Ditch 305 

Fresno  Canal 288 

Last  Chance  Ditch 301 

Lower  Kings  River  Canal 303 

Peoples  Ditch 299 

Stimson  Canal 311 

Kings  River 2W.  -J.w.  _>vi.  -_KIO,  291, 292, 293, 

294, 295, 2%,  299, 300, 301, 303, 305, 306,  310, 311, 314, 318 

Los  Angeles  River 343 

Canals- 
Cache  Creek 173,176,179,180,181,187 

Chowchilla  Creek 249 

Fresno  River 249 

Kings  River 282 

Los  Angeles  River 243 

Salinas  River 197,201,202,203 

San  .Toaquin  Valley 218,223,246 

Yuba  River 139,152 

Capay  Ditch  Company 180 

Capital  for  irrigation  works,  difficulty  of  acquiring  ...      108 
Carey  law- 
acceptance  of  land  under,  recommended 113 

l«.ssiliilitiesof,  in  California 109 

Caribou  Lake 78 

Carmelita  Ditch 297 

Cecil,  Lord  Robert,  discussion  of  underground  waters  .      198 

Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal 291 

water  rates 292 

Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Ditch  Company,  litigation 

affecting 58, 60 

Centerville  bottoms,  canals 283 

Centerville  Ditch 289 

Central  California  Electric  Company 153 

Central  Canal 33 

area  covered 33 

cost 33 

reasons  for  failure 33 

Central  Irrigation  District 33 

China  Slough 224,248 

ChowchillaCanal 223,247 

Chowchilla  Creek — 

canal  systems 226 

claims  to  water 228 

description  and  watershed 226 

flow 226,227,232 

riparian  rights 233 

Chandler,  A.E 156,157 

Chico— 

population  decreased 34 

rainfall 30 

visited 29 

Chico  Creek,  owned  by  Bid  well  estate 34 

ChinaDitch 149 

Citrus  fruits,  returns  from,  southern  California 25, 26 

Claims  to  water — 

Arroyo  Seco 196,197 


INDEX. 


403 


Claims  to  water— Continued.  •  Page. 

C;lr)lr  t  'reck  -- 

discussion 170 

table 165 

Chowcliilla  Creek 228,232 

extent  of.  (in  si rranis  investigated 46 

Fresno  Kiver 228,232 

Hemet  Crock 390 

Kings  Kiver 269 

Los  Angers  Kivcr 330 

no  logical  relation  to  supply 84,85 

recording  of,  not  sat  isfact. >ry 206, 207, 267, 392 

Salinas  River 195,197 

San  Antonio  Creek 196,197 

San.loa.|"in  Kiver 36,228,232 

San  Lorenzo  Creek 196,197 

S\veetwater  Kiver — 

discussion 363 

table 360 

Yuba  River  and  tributaries 121 

Clausen  and  Bliikeley  Canal 304 

Clear  Lake 156 

as  storage  reservoir 158 

Clear  Lake  Water  Company 178,182 

Cleveland  Ditch 290 

Colonial  Irrigation  Company 94 

Colonies  in  San  Joaquin  Valley 218 

Colony  Dam 99,101 

Common  law  of  England- 
adopted  by  legislature 119 

inapplicable  to  arid  regions 39 

Connick,  H.D.H.— 

assistance  of,  acknowledged 5 

report  on  use  of  water  of  Yuba  River 130 

Continuous  use  of  water,  users  entitled  to 275,319 

Control  of  water — 

importance 18 

public 41,54,67,103 

socialistic 106 

State 41,53,54,67,274,317,321,393 

Cooperative  canal,  the 109 

Cost  of  irrigation  in  arid  region 107 

Cottonwood  Creek,  Utah — 

population  along 31 

value  of  irrigated  lands 81 

visited 31 

Cottonwood  Ditch  Company 180 

Court  decisions  conflicting 40 

Courts  not  responsible  for  litigation 62 

Crescent  Canal 59,310 

Crooked  Lake  Reservoir 124 

DaggettDitch 147 

Deadrnans  Lake,  area 125 

Deer  Creek- 
drainage  area 115 

water  rights 151 

Deer  Lake,  area 125 

Dennis  Ditch 284 

Dennis,  J.  S.,  discussion  of  riparian  rights  quoted 42,50 

1  >esert  land  law  in  Honey  Lake  Basin 109 

Development,  obstacles  to,  California 29 

Distribution,  appropriation  of  water  for 38 

Distribution  of  water 80,90,103,228 

among  canals 90,250,295,306,311,317 

among  users 90, 

147, 174, 286, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 
297,299,300,  301,  303,  304,  305,306,311,313,348,388 


Distribution  of  water— Continued.  I'agc. 

Browns  Valley 136 

Cache  Creek  Valley 1 7 1 

ordinance  regarding i7,~> 

Fowler  Switch  Canal 291 

reform  in ,  effected  by  Wyoming  law 105 

Salinas  Valley 199 

ordinance  regarding 199 

San  Joaquin  River 252 

should  be  controlled  by  State 322 

S\\  rctwater  system 385 

District  irrigation  for  Honey  Lake  Valley Ill 

District  irrigation  law 217,236,274 

improvement  of,  recommended 113 

District  irrigation  system- 
bonds  of,  pledged  by  State,  proposed 110 

hope  in 110 

reason  for  failure 33, 110 

Diversified  farming  needed  in  California 28 

Domestic  use  of  water  should  be  preferred 398 

Dos  Palos  Canal 224,248 

Dry  Creek,  drainage  area 115 

Dunnigan-Byrd  Ditch 284 

Duty  of  investigators 21 

Duty  of  water- 
Auburn 136 

Browns  Valley 132 

Cache  Creek 187 

HemetCreek 392 

Honey  Lake  Valley 88,89 

Kate  Hays  Company 145 

law  fails  to  provide  for  determination 108 

Los  Angeles  River 345 

Sacramento  Valley 27 

Salinas  Valley 199 

San  Joaquin  Valley 28,226,254 

Sweetwater system 356,385 

Eagle  Lake 75 

claims  to  water 87,88 

East  Side  Canal 224,247 

Egypt- 
compared  with  California 29 

compared  with  Sacramento  Valley 26 

Government  ownership  of  canals 64 

Elche  (Spain),  district  of,  water  rights 40 

Elkhorn  Canal 290 

Emigrant  Ditch  Company,  litigation  affecting 58, 305 

Eminent  domain,  right  of , should  be  extended  for  ir- 
rigation works..   107,322,349,399 

Englebright,  W.  F.,  data  furnished  by 122, 123, 126 

English  Reservoir 125 

Eureka  Lake  and  Yuba  Canal  Company,  storage  reser- 
voirs       124 

Eureka  Lake  Ditch 143 

Eureka  Lake  Reservoir 124,142 

Eureka  Lake  Mining  Company,  storage  of  water 1 15 

Evaporation— 

Bloomfleld  Canal 147 

Browns  Valley 134 

Buena  Vista  Lake  (note) 75 

Honey  Lake 75 

Kern  Lake  (note) 75 

Kings  River 323 

LakeFordyce 126 

LakesinUtah  (note) 75 

Sweetwater  River 357 

TulareLake  (note) 75 


404 


INDEX. 


Page. 

Excelsior  Ditch 148 

Excelsior  Water  and  Mining  Company 149 

canals 148 

dams 181 

reservoirs 151 

water  rights  on  South  Yuba 152 

Fall  Creek  Lakes  Reservoir 124 

Farm  Ditch 150 

Farmers  Irrigating  Ditch  Company 173 

Faucherie  Lake  Reservoir 124,142 

Feather  River 118 

Fertilizers,  use  of  in  fruit  growing 28 

Fink  Channel 285 

FinkDitch 286 

Forest  protection 27,126,127,130,400 

Fowler  Switch  Canal 290 

litigation  affecting 58,60,61 

waterrutes 291 

Franchises  to  water — 

in  European  countries 64 

suggested  for  California 64 

water  rights  treated  as 37, 323 

Fresno  Canal 286 

Fresno   Canal    and    Irrigation    Company,    litigation 

affecting 58,60 

Fresno  County,  benefits  of  irrigation 217 

Fresno  Plains 263 

Fresno  River — 

canals 225,249 

claims  to  water 228 

description  and  watershed 225 

flow 225,227,232 

irrigation  from 225 

riparian  rights  claimed 233 

Fresno  Slough — 

Borland  pump 314 

Lee  pump 313 

Mitchler  pump 313 

pumping  from 313 

Whiteside  pump 313 

Fruit  growing  in  California,  limit  to  profitable  exten- 
sion         28 

Gaging  of  streams  by  State  engineer,  Wyoming 104 

Garber,  John,  argument  in  Lux  v.  Haggin,  quoted...       44 

Glenn  estate,  value  of  land 31 

Gordon,  William,  deed  from  Mexican  Government 

confirmed  by  United  States  patent in,  172 

Grain  farming — 

Greeley  Colony,  Colorado 29 

Sacramento  Valley 29 

Grain,  irrigation  of,  Browns  Valley 133 

Grant  Canal 290,309 

Grunsky,  C.E 58,60 

field  of  investigations 5 

reporton  Kings  River 259 

Guesisosi  grant 156 

Haas,  E.F.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 5 

Haines,  A.,  water  rights  denned  by 378 

Halen,  A.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged .' 5,75 

Hall,  William  Ham.,  quoted 26,75,76,219,232 

Hanke  Ditch 284 

Hardy  grant 156 

Hawley  Lake,  area 126 

Hay,  irrigation  of,  Browns  Valley 133 

Health,  influence  of  irrigation  on 32,135,266 

Hemet  Creek- 
claims  to  water 390 

description  and  watershed 389 


Hemct  Creek— Continued.  Page. 

duty  of  water 892 

flow 389 

lands  irrigated 392 

water  rates 392 

wa t LT- right  contracts 392 

Hemet  Dam 389,391 

Hemet  Valley,  description 3^9 

Hcnkcnins,  J.C.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 5 

Hermann,  F.  C.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 5 

Hilgard,  E.W.,  quoted 221 

Kite  Ditch 312 

Homestead  law  in  Honey  Lake  Basin 109 

lloiu'y  Lake — 

:iiva 75 

toss  by  evaporation 75 

measures  water  supply  of  Honey  Lake  Basin 75 

water  flowing  into,  estimate 76 

Honey  Luke  Basin— 

claims  to  water 83, 89 

rliimiti' 72 

contribution  for  investigations  on,  from  California 

Water  and  Forest  Association 6 

description 72 

duty  of  water gg 

first  laws 71 

industries 72 

irrigated  area 107 

needs 73 

possible  irrigable  area 76 

problems 73 

products 72 

report  on,  by  W.  E.  Smythe 71 

storage  sites 77 

surrounding  resources 73 

water  measurements 80 

water-right  system 108 

watershed 76 

water  supply 74 

waste  of  water 76 

Hydraulic  mining— 

resumed  under  Camanetti  act 127 

suspended  on  Yuba  River 127 

Immigration,  state  of,  California 19 

Inadequate  water  laws,  obstacles  presented  by 34 

India,  government  ownership  of  canals 64 

Industrial  conditions  near  Cliico  and  Willows 29,30 

Instructions,  letter  of,  to  agents  and  experts 23 

Investigations  by  board  of  control,  necessity  for 66 

Investigators,  duty  of 21 

Irrigated  land  in  California 19 

Irrigation— 

effecton  land  values 25,294 

from  Cache  Creek 171 

from  San  Joaquin  River  affected  by  navigation. . .  18 

from  Sacramento  River  affected  by  navigation...  18 

importance 215 

northern  California 26 

not  "everywhere  a  necessity  in  California 17 

obstacles  to  in  California,  local  in  character IS 

prejudice  against 217 

puebloof  Los  Angeles 378 

reasons  for  restricting  investigations  to 24 

southern  California 25 

value  of,  to  California 17 

Irrigation  development — 

affected  by  unfavorable  social  conditions 1!) 

California 216 

San  Joaquin  Valley 216,217 


INDEX. 


405 


Page. 

Irrigation  districts 33,110,111,113,217,236,274,399 

State  aid  for,  recommended 110, 399 

Irrigation  "head" 343 

Irrigation  in  California — 

opposition  to 31 

present  and  future 25 

Irrigation  inviMijiations— 

continuation  of.  recommended 349,394 

scope 20 

should  be  conducted  liy  Slate  and  Federal  govern- 
ments    322 

Irrigation   law   for  California,   commission  to  frame, 

should  be  appointed 350,395,399 

Island  La  ke  Reservoir 124 

Italy- 
compared  with  California 29 

government  ownership  of  canals 64 

issues  licenses  to  water 37 

ownership  of  water 64 

Jack  Ititeh 285 

Jackson  Lake  Reservoir 124 

Jacobie  Ditch 284 

James  Canal 224, 247, 309 

James  East  Side  Canal 312 

James  West  Side  Canal 312 

Johnston ville,  irrigation  situation ,  93 

Kate  Hays  Ditch 144 

Ki'lsey.  K.  K.  s.. ; instance  of, acknowledged 5 

Kern  Lake,  evaporation  from  (note) 75 

Kings  Canal 304 

Kings  River — 

canal  systems 282 

claims  to  water 269 

contributions  for  investigations  on,  from  California 

Water  and  Forest  Association 6 

description  and  watershed 260 

evaporation  experiments 323 

flow 267 

irrigation  development 259 

irrigation  practice 314 

report  on,  by  C.  E.  Grunsky 259 

settlement  of  water  right  by  mutual  agreement . .  317 

storage 269 

Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal 286 

Kings  River  and  Fresno  Canal  and  Irrigation  Com- 
pany, litigation  alTeeting 58 

Kings  River  district,  rainfall  and  climate 266 

Laguna  de  Tache  Canal 308,309 

Laguna  de  Tache  Rancho,  canal  system 308 

Lake  district.  Honey  Lake  Valley — 

adjudication  of  water  rights 95 

claims  to  water 87, 88 

Lake  Fordyce— 

depth  of  snow,  diagram 123 

evaporation 126 

precipitation,  diagram 122 

Lake  Fordyce  Reservoir 124, 140 

Lake  Leavitt  district — 

irrigation  situation 94 

storage 78 

Lake  Spaulding  Reservoir 123,124,140 

Lake  Spencer 125 

Land— 

a  public  utility 64 

acquirement  of,  under  Carey  law,  Wyoming 109 

value  of,  in  Browns  Valley 135 

value  of,  ou  South  Yuba 152 


Land,  irrigated,  value  of—  Page. 

American  River 27 

Cottonwood  Creek,  Utah 31 

San  Joaquin  Valley 218 

southern  California 25 

Land  values,  effect  of  irrigation  on 294 

Landlordism,  in  Sacramento  Valley 31 

Large  enterprises,  desire  for,  California 32 

Last  Chance  Ditch 300 

litigation  affecting 59, 60, 61 

Lease  of  water,  allowed  under  riparian  doctrine 47 

Legislation,  recommendations  regarding,  agreed  to  by 

investigators 65, 396 

Leinberger  Slough 301 

Liberty  Canal 305 

License  to  water,  Italy 37 

Lippincott,  J.  B 355 

Litigation — 

Cache  Creek— 

Cacheville   Agricultural    Ditch   Company   v. 

James  Moore 176 

Moore  v.  Capay  and  Adams  Ditch  companies. .  180 
Woodland  Ditch  Company  v.  Clear  Lake  Water 

Company 178 

forced  upon  water  users 62, 323 

Honey  Lake  Valley 91 

Kings  River 58 

court  adjudications 277 

discussion 6,27,282 

Los  Angeles  River — 

City  of  Los  Angeles  v.  Baldwin 336 

City  of  Los  Angeles  v.  Crystal  Springs  Land  and 

Water  Company 342 

City  of  Los  Angeles  v.  Pomeroy 340 

City  of  Los  Angeles  v.  West  Los  Angeles  Water 

Company 342 

Elmsi).  City  of  Los  Angeles 339 

Feiizt'.  City  of  Los  Angeles 337 

Los  Angeles  Water  Company  v.  City  of  Los  An- 
geles  '. .' 337 

Vernon  Irrigation  Company  v.  City  of  Los  An- 
geles   339 

Salinas  Valley — 

Burrows  i1.  Burrows 205 

Green  r.  Carotta 204 

San  Luis  Water  Company  v.  Estrada 206 

Smith  t>.  Corbit 205 

Zimmler  «>.  San  Luis  Water  Company 204 

San  Joaquin  River  and  tributaries — 

California  Pastoral  and  Agricultural  Company 

v.  Bliss  etal 244 

Chapin  v.  Brown 238 

Goode  v.  San  Joaquin  Electric  Company 244 

Hite  r.  Madera  Canal  and  Irrigation  Company.  245 

Howard  v.  Stitt 237 

Lowry  v.  San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal 

and  Irrigation  Company 242 

Madera   Canal   and    Irrigation    Company  v. 

Miller&Lux 243 

Madera  Irrigation  District 238 

Miller  &  Lux  et  al.  v.  Borland 242 

Miller  &  Lux  et  al  v.  Enterprise  Canal  Com- 
pany    229 

Miller  &  Lux  v.  Fresno  Flume  and  Irrigation 

Company 238 

Ross  v.  Lawson 238 

Stevenson  v.   San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River 

Canal  and  Irrigation  Company 245 


406 


INDEX. 


Litigation— Continued.  Page. 

Swcetwatcr  River,  cost 374,379,3X4 

Yiilm  River 120 

Little  Grass  Valley  reservoir  site 144 

Lombardy,  ownership  of  water 64 

Lomlmnly  riiiins.  compared  with  Sacramento  Valley.  29 

Long  Valley  Creek 75 

adjudication  of  water  rights 95 

water  supply,  estimate 76 

watershed 77 

Lorca  (Spain),  water  rights 40 

Los  Angeles,  created  by  irrigation 26 

Los  Angeles  River- 
claims  to  water 330 

description  and  watershed 329 

distribution  of  water  among  users 343 

duty  of  water 345 

examples  of  notices  of  appropriation 333 

first  water  rights 328 

flow 329 

irrigation  practice 345 

litigation 335 

pumping  plant" 345 

report  on,  by  Edward  M.  Hoggs 327 

rights  of  pueblo 329 

sale  of  water 344 

sale  of  water  rights 345 

shortage  of  water 345 

water  rates 343,344,345 

Lost  River  Reservoir 124 

Lower  Kings  River  Canal 302 

Lower  Kings  River  Ditch  Company 59,60 

litigation  affecting 59,60 

Lovelace  Canal 304 

Lux  v.  Haggin,   decision  regarding  riparian  rights, 

quoted 48 

Madera Canal  and  Irrigation  Company,  canal  system.  225,249 
Hanson,  Marsden — 

field  of  investigation 5 

opi   ions  upon  points  submitted  in  instructions  ...  128 

report  on  Yuba  River  115 

Market  gardens  around  Stockton 25 

Marsh,  G.  P..  quoted 39 

Marysville  and  Nevada  Power  Company 147 

Marx,  C.  D.— 

field  of  investigation 6 

report  on  Salinas  River 193 

Mead,  El  wood- 
detail  of  to  California,  asked 22 

instructions  to  experts 24 

report  on  agricu Itural  situation  in  California 17 

Meadow  Lake  Reservoir 140 

Meadow  Reservoir 124 

Measurement  of  water — 

Browns  Valley 134 

Honey  Lake  Basin 80 

Kings  River 314 

Moore  Ditch 176 

units  employed  uncertain 176, 229, 271, 334 

Mexican  water  laws 216 

Middle  Fork  of  Yuba  River — 

drainage  area 115 

reserve  iirs 125 

Middle  Lake  Reservoir 124 

Miller  &  Lux,  canal  systems 223,224 

Millrace  Canal 306 

Milton  Mining  Company,  storage  of  water  (note) 115 

Milton  Reservoir 125,144 

Minckler,  W.  D.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 5,80 


Page. 

Miners  Ditch 148 

Miners — 

early  water  customs 216 

established  water  regulations 118 

influence  of  on  early  water  law 234 

Miners  inch,  standard  of  measurement 134 

Mining  in  California- 
early  predominance  over  agriculture 104 

first  basis  of  water-right  decisions 91 

Mining  laws  of  California — 

beginning  of  law  of  appropriation 347 

evolution 35 

Mining  rights — 

Sweetwater  River 377 

Yuba  River  Basin 128 

Mission  fathers — 

colonization  of  California 327 

early  irrigation 216, 234, 327 

settlements  begun  by,  southern  California 26 

Mitchell  Ditch 285 

Monopoly  in  water 39,217 

Moore  Ditch 173,174,187 

distribution  of  water 174 

flow 156 

management 182 

Moore,  James — 

deed  from  Thos.  Harbin 172 

origin  of  water  rights 171 

Moors,  irrigated  agriculture  in  Valencia  dates  back 

to 40 

Murphy,  Chief  Justice,  decision  quoted 91,104 

Murphy  Slough  Association 306 

MusselSlough  Ditch 299 

Nataqua,  proposed  formation  of 71 

National  aid  for  irrigation  ..  110,207,257,322,349,394,399,400 
National  irrigation  law  not  contemplated  by  investi- 
gators    20 

National  irrigation  works  for  Honey  Lake  Basin 110 

National  legislation,  recommendations  regarding  ..  113, 130 
Navigation — 

affects  irrigation  on  Sacramento  and  San  Joaqnin 

rivers 18 

rights  on  Sacramento  and  San  Joaquin  rivers 68 

should  be  protected  by  canalizing  rivers 394 

New  Blue  Point  Mining  Company 153 

New  JackDitch 285 

New  Town  Ditch 149 

New  South  Wales,  Australia,  riparian  rights 52 

Nile  River,  irrigated  agriculture 29 

Nile  Valley,  population 29 

North  Bloomfield  Gravel  and  Mining  Company.  124, 145, 146 
North  Bloomfield  Mining  Company,  storage  of  water 

(note)  115 

North  Fork  Ditch — 

value  of  irrigated  land 27 

value  of  products 27 

North  Fork  of  Yuba  River — 

drainage  area 115 

reservoirs 125 

Northwest  Irrigation  Act 57 

establishment  of  water  titles 63 

sections  relating  to  riparian  rights 50 

Notices  of  appropriation- 
amounts  stated  in 334 

discussion 36 

examples  from  Los  Angeles  River 333 

examples  from  San  Joaquin  River 230 

examples  from  Susan  River 84 


INDEX. 


407 


Notices  of  appropriation — Continued.  Page. 

filing 164,170,367 

importance  of  recording 331 

indefinite 84,  85,  8<i,  87,  228,  233,  331,  333 

insufficient 331,  335 

not  necessary 197 

posting 164,255 

purposes  enumerated  in 334 

recording 36,  81,  82,  164,  206,  228,  255,  331,367 

San  .Toaquin  River  and  tributaries 37 

usrs  specified 331 

uncertain  units  employed 334 

Nutter,  E.  II.,  report  on  underground  \vatcr  supply 

of  Salinas  Valley 208 

Obstacles  to  irrigation,  presented  by  inadequate  water 

laws 34 

O'Brien  Ditch 148 

Old  Canal 224,248 

Opposition  to  irrigation 31 

promoted  by  failures  under  Wright  act 34 

Orchards,  irrigation  of,  Browns  Valley 133 

Ousley  Bar  Ditch 150 

Outside  Canal 224,248 

Overappropriation  of  streams 46,54,88 

Ownership  of  water- 
Italy 64 

monopolistic 39. 217 

necessity  for  definite  doctrine  in  California 37 

private 34,37,38,47,41,91,92.105,106,345,346,348,384 

public, 64,105,175,216 

remarks  on,  by  Baird  Smith 64 

Packer  Lake,  area 125 

Parallel  Canal ., 224,248 

1  'a sadena,  created  by  irrigation 26 

Peak  Lakes  reservoirs,  statistics 124 

Peoples  Ditch 297 

Peoples  Ditch  Company,  litigation  affecting 59, 60 

Permit  to  take  water — 

desirable  for  California 68 

necessary  in  Wyoming 38 

Pete  Creek,  water  supply,  estimate 76 

Petition  for  investigations  in  California 23 

Pine  Creek 77 

Placer  mining,  rights  to  water  for 18 

Plan  of  work  of  investigators 22 

Pleasant  Valley  Ditch 150 

I'o  Valley,  Italy,  population 29 

Police  powers  of  water  commissioners,  Wyoming 105 

Population— 

Cottonwood  Creek,  Utah 31 

decrease  in  some  districts  in  California 19 

increase  in  irrigated  districts 217 

Nile  Valley,  Egypt 29 

Po  Valley,  Italy 29 

Sacramento  Valley 29 

Porter,  D'Arcy 211 

Poso  Slough 224 

Powell,  J.  W.,  quoted 39 

Power- 
Cache  Creek 160 

rightsfor,  Sweetwater  River 377 

Tuolumne  River,  transmitted  to  San  Francisco...       18 

utility  of  California  streams  for 18 

Yuba  River  Basin 127,153 

Preferred  use  of  water * 394, 398 

Prejudice  against  irrigation 32, 33, 217 

Priority  of  right  to  water— 

recognized  by  statute 81, 105, 119, 234, 322 

Stateehould  fix 397 


Page. 

Private  ownership  of  water 38, 41 , 92, 105, 345, 346 

Chtco,  Butte,  and  Rock  creeks 34 

court  decisions  adverse  to 348 

evils 106 

grew  out  of  mining  laws  and  customs 91 

natural  product  of  California  law 37 

Sweetwater  River 384 

Private  property  in  water  not  allowed  in  most  coun- 
tries       106 

Problem  before  people  of  California 18 

Problems  of  arid  West,  new 20 

Prod  nets  of  California 217 

Public  control  of  water 41 

attitude  of  water  users  toward 54 

necessity  for 67 

Public  control  of  irrigation — 

desirable  adjunct  to  Wright  act 33 

law  fails  to  provide 103 

necessity  for 35,39,54,67,274 

Public  land,  acquirement  of 81 

Public  ownership  of  water 64,105,175 

Mexico 216 

Public  utilities,  laud  and  water  as 64 

Pueblo  of  Los  Angeles- 
irrigation  328 

rights  to  Los  Angeles  River 329 

Pumping  plants — 

Cache  Creek  Valley 183 

Borland  pump 314 

Fresno  Slough 313 

Lee  pump 313 

Los  Angeles  River 345 

Mitchler  pump 313 

Salinas  Valley 201, 202, 203 

Sweetwater  River 358,368,369 

Whiteside  pump 313 

l'nr|H>ses  of  appropriations,  enumeration 334 

Rainfall— 

absence  of,  during  harvest 30 

Chico : 30 

Clear  Lake  watershed,  diagram 159 

Kings  River  watershed 266 

obstacle  to  diversified  farming,  California 30 

Salinas  Valley 194 

San  Francisco 265 

San  Joaquin  Valley ; 222 

Yuba  River  Basin,  diagram 122 

Willows 30 

Woodland ,  diagram 160 

Rancho  Canada  de  Capay 155 

Rancho  Lagnna  de  Taehe,  litigation  affecting 60, 61 

Reclamation  of  Honey  Lake  Basin,  cost 107,108,  111 

Recommendations  and  conclusions 397 

E.  M.Boggs 346,349 

C.  E.  Grunsky 322 

Marsden  Manson 128 

C.D.Marx 207 

J.D.Schuyler 392 

W.E.  Smythe Ill 

FrankSoule. 255 

J.M.Wilson 189 

Records  of  appropriations— 

.       central  office  for,  recommended 68, 191, 207, 255, 3L'3 

confusion  of 101 

importance  of 331 

indefinite 377 

unsatisfactory 128,129,255 

Redlands,  created  by  irrigation 26 


408 


INDEX. 


Page. 

ReedDitch 306 

Rental  of  water 19 

allowed  under  riparian  doctrine 47 

appropriation  for 38 

Rhoads  Canal 304 

Rice  Ditch 284 

Riffle  Box  Ditch 148 

Right  of  way  over  public  domain,  permitted  for  canals 

by  U.  S.  statutes 120 

Riparian  proprietors- 
may  use  water  for  irrigation 43, 234 

rights  of,  California , 106,235 

Riparian  rights 42, 235 

abrogation  of 207,255,266 

adopted  by  legislative  enactment 234, 272 

arbitrary  exercise  of 47 

case  of  Lux  c.  Haggin 43, 120 

case  of  Stowell  r.  Johnson 43 

contradictions  and  uncertainties  of,  California 46 

contrary  to  rights  of  appropriation* 46,119 

doctrine  iu  California  different  from  riparian  doc- 
trine elsewhere 44,46 

English  colonies 49 

Canada 49 

New  South  Wales,  Australia 52 

Victoria,  Australia .* 51 

extentof 321 

in  conflict  with  State  and  national  laws  and  cus- 
toms       120 

in fluence  of,  on  irrigation 129, 254, 256, 272 

inseparably  annexed  to  soil 120 

Kings  River 276 

limits  of,  should  be  defined 189, 190, 258, 322 

litigation  over,  Sweetwater  River 374 

made  paramount  to  appropriatore'  rights  by  statute 

and  decision 106 

modification  recommended 112, 234, 393, 394 

necessity  for  determining  limit  and  character 46 

not  abrogated  by  definite  laws,  California 43 

not  adapted  to  arid  land 42,48,91,106,374 

not  affected  by  California  appropriation  law...      81, 

106,235 

not  considered  applicable  in  mining 234 

not  created  by  use  or  destroyed  by  disuse 120 

not  recognized  by  Mexico 172 

not  recognized  in  Spanish  and  Mexican  laws 118 

pennit  of  reasonable  use  for  irrigation 120 

recognized  in  California. 42, 374 

sale  of 47 

sale  of,  creates  water  monopoly 49 

San  Joaquin  River  and  tributaries 233 

set  aside  by  early  mining  practice 119 

should  be  inseparable  from  riparian  lands 49 

should  be  restricted  to  low-water  discharge  of 

streams 129 

States  and  countries  in  which  abrogated 42 

subject  to  sale,  rental  or  lease 47 

subordination    to   appropriators'    rights,    recom- 
mended        349 

uncertainties  of 46, 120, 272, 273, 318, 321 

ftiili 42 

Riverdale  Ditch 307 

Rock  Creek,  in  private  ownership t. 34 

Rock  Creek  Reservoir 153 

Ross,  E.  in- 
decision as  to  water  right 108 

decision  in  Lux  v.  Haggin 44 


Rotation  of  crops —  Page. 

(ireeley  Colony,  Colorado 30 

possibilities  of,  California 30 

value 2M 

Rough  and  Ready  Ditch l-ly 

Round  Lake  Reservoir 121 

Roundtree  Ditch SOU 

Rural  life,  attractions  of.  California 19 

Sacramento  River — 

eompared  with  Po  River ,  29 

flow 2K 

navigation  on,  affects  irrigation Is 

navigation  rights fis 

use  of  wati'r 27 

waste  of  water 20 

Sacramento  Valley-- 

compared  with  plainsof  Lomluinlyand  Niledelta..  29 

duly  of  water .'.  .„ 27 

grain  fanning 29 

industrial  conditions,  near  rhieo  and  Willows 29,30 

irrigable  area 27 

populat  ion 29 

(Mtssibilities 26 

products 28 

returns  from  citrus  fruits 27,28 

Sagebrush  war,  Honey  Lake  Valley 71 

Sale  of  riparian  rights 47 

Sale  nt  water 141 , 143, 344 

appropriation  for 38 

permitted  by  riparian  doctrine 47 

Salinas  River- 
claims  to  water 195, 197 

contributions  for  investigations  on,  from  Califor- 
nia Water  and  Forest  Association 6 

drainage  area 193 

flow 195,196 

report  on,  by  C.D.Marx 193 

Salinas  Valley — 

artesian  water  supply 210 

description 193 

distribution  of  water 199 

duty  of  water 199 

irrigation  practice '. 201 

irrigation  problems 1% 

litigation 204 

pumping  plants 198, 201, 202, 203, 211 

rainfall 194 

report  on  underground  water  supply,  by  E.   H. 

Nutter 208 

storage  198 

underground  waters. 198 

water  rates 200 

water-right  contract 200 

wells 211 

Salmon  Lake 125 

San  Antonio  Creek,  claims  to  water 196, 197 

San  Diego,  created  by  irrigation 26 

San  Francisco,  rainfall 265 

Sanger  Flume 283 

San  Jacinto  River- 
description  3s;i 

diversions  from 389 

report  on,  by  .1.  D.  Schuyler 3X\ 

San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  tonal 2*2 

San  Joaquin  and  Kings  River  Canal  and  Irrigation 

Company,  canal  system 224 . 24s 

San  Joaquin  River- 
canals  223,246 


INDEX. 


4IIU 


Sun  .inaquin  River—  ( 'ontinncd.  Page. 

claims  I"  wilier 36,'J-Jx.'-':'.L' 

cMiitribution  1'or  investi>,'!itioiison,  from  California 

Water  and  Forest  Assucintion 6 

description  and  witlershed 218 

flow 27,222,226,232 

irrigation 223 

navigation  »n.  affects  irrigation 18 

navigation  rights 68 

report  on,  by  Frank  Sonic 215 

riparian  rights, claimed 233 

storage 27,225 

tributaries 219 

value  of  forestry 27 

value  of  winter  irrigation 27 

waste  of  water 27 

San  Joaquin  Valley — 

area  irrigated  compared  with  Egypt 29 

area  susceptible  of  irrigation 226 

canal  systems 218 

climate 222 

colonies 218 

description 262 

duty  of  water 28,226,254 

irrigated  area 223,226,262 

irrigation  development 217 

irrigation  practice 253 

physical  features 218 

possibilities 26 

products 223 

rainfall 222 

soils 220,263 

storage  possibilities 228 

water  rates 28,252 

water  supply 227 

San  Lorenzo  Creek — 

Halms  in  water 1% 

.    flow 197 

Santa  Clara  Valley,  irrigation 25 

Santa  Rita  Canal 224 

Sardine  Lake 125 

Sawmill  Flat  Reservoir 124 

Saxonia  Lake, area 125 

Schuyler.J.  D 46,53 

field  of  investigations 5 

report  on  Sweetwater  River 353 

Seepage— 

Bloomfield  Canal 147 

Browns  Valley 134 

effect  on  water  rights,  Sweetwater  River 384 

Selma  Irrigation  District 275,2% 

Separate   ownership  of  water  and   land,  results  in 

United  States 38,39,40,41 

Seventy-Six  Canal 293 

See  also  Alta  Irrigation  District. 
Seventy-Six   Land   and  Water   Company,  litigation 

affecting 59,60 

Shotgun  Lake  Reservoir 124 

Silver  Lakes  as  reservoir 78 

Smith,  Baird,  remarks  on  ownership  of  water 64 

Smythe.W.E 38,58 

field  of  investigations 6 

reporton  Honey  Lake  Basin 71 

Social  conditions  in  California,  unfavorable  to  irriga- 
tion development 19 

Soil- 

Browns;Valley .  135 

Cache  Creek  Valley 160 

23856— No.  100—01 27 


Soil— Continued.  1'ace. 

effect  of  irrigation  on 1:54 

impoverished  by  wheat  growing js 

impoverishment  of.  stopped  by  alfalfa •_'* 

San  Joaqnin  Valley 263 

Sonic.  Frank us.  ;«i,:!7,.r>x 

field  of  investigation *     5 

report  on  San  Joaquin  River -jift 

South  Fork  of  North  Fork  of  Yuba  River,  watershed 

and  storage ]2(J 

South  Fork  of  Yuba  River- 
drainage  area 115 

rainfall  on  watershed 118 

storage 123 

South  Fork  Water  Ditch  Company n:i 

South  Yuba  Canal  system,  description 140 

South  Yuba  Ditch 14s 

South  Yuba  River,  water  rights in'2 

South  Yuba  Water  Company 139 

distributing  canals 141 

rental  charged  for  water 27 

storage 115 

Spain- 
similarity  to  California 39 

water  laws 39 

Special  tribunal — 

attitude  of  courts  and  attorneys  toward 62 

duties 63 

jurisdiction 65 

need  of,  California 58 

.sv  ,  aim  Board  of  Control. 

Speculative  ownership  of  water 37, 38, 47 

natural  product  of  California  law 37 

Sacramento  Valley 34 

Spenceville  Ditch 150 

State  control  of  water,  need  of 41, 

53, 54, 67, 274, 317, 321, 393, 397 

State,  duty  of 61,397 

State  engineer 207 

duties  of,  California 67 

recommended  for  California 112, 

255,257,349,393,394,397 

term  of  office,  California 69 

Wyoming 104 

State  irrigation  works  for  Honey  Lake  Basin 110 

State  laws,  rights  to  water  based  on 20 

State  legislation,  recommended 112, 258, 397 

Stimson  Canal 311 

litigation  affecting 60 

Stirling  Reservoir 125,140 

Stockton,  windmills  around 25 

Stoney  Creek,  contributions  for  investigations  on,  from 

California  Water  and  Forest  Association 6 

Storage 255,257,323,353 

Chowchilla  Creek 250 

Clear  Lake..... 158 

Honey  Lake  Basin 77 

Kings  River 269 

management 126 

National  Government  should  aid 393 

possibilities    investigated   by  State   engineer   in 

Wyoming 104 

Salinas  Valley 198 

San  Joaquin  Valley 27, Zl\ 22S 

speculations  regarding,  in  Honey  Lake  Valley  ....       98 

Sweetwater  River 356 

water  rights  for,  Sweetwater  River 384 

Yuba  River 115,121, 123,142,146, 14<i,151 


410 


INDEX. 


I'age. 

Stowell  •!>.  Johnson,  cited 43 

strawberries,  irrigiition  of,  Browns  Valley 1:^ 

Subterranean  water,  appropriation  of,  legal 366 

Subterranean  water  supply,  development   of.  Sweet- 
water  River 369 

Summer  fallow,  Sacramento  Valley 30 

Summit  Lake  Reservoir 124,262 

construction  of  dam,  diagram 140 

description  and  cost 140 

Summit  Water  and  Irrigation  Company 142 

coat  of  works 143 

sale  of  water 143 

Sunset  Irrigation  District 275,296 

Superintendents  of  water  divisions,  Wyoming 104 

Supervisors,  fixing  of  water  rates  by 28, 

34, 41, 108, 175, 274, 319, 345,  379,  :W),  382, 388 

Surface  flow,  dispute  over 54 

Surveys  by  board  of  control,  necessity  for 66 

Susan  River 75 

adjudication  of  water  rights 95 

claims  to  water 84, 88 

flow 80 

water  supply,  estimate 76 

Snsanville,  irrigation  situation 92 

Sweem  Ditch 290 

Sweet  water  Dam 354 

Sweetwater  River- 
claims  to  water — 

discussion 363 

table 360 

development  of  subterranean  water  supply 369 

duty  of  water 356, 385 

evaporation 357 

flow 359 

litigation- 
City  of  National  City  r.  San  Diego  Land  and 

Town  Company 382 

Hall  water-rate  case 383 

Lanning  v.  Osborne 380 

National  City  water-rate  case 379 

San  Diego  Land  and  Town  Company  r.  Jasper.      382 
Sharpe  r.  San  Diego  Laud  and  Town  Com- 
pany       382 

physical  characteristics 554 

pumping 358, 368, 369 

rei>ort  on,  by  J.  D.  Schuyler 353 

rights  to  underground  flow 384 

storage 356,384 

water  rates 374,385 

water-right  contracts 385 

water  rights 377 

watershed 355 

water  supply 356,357 

Sweetwater  system,  distribution  of  water  among  users      388 

Tait ,  C.  E. ,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 6 

Teele,  R.  P.,  assistance  of,  acknowledged 6 

TempleSlough 224 

Tenant  farming,  Sacramento  Valley 31 

Thompson  Creek 77 

Title  to  water- 
acquirement  of •  207 

State  should  provide  definition  of .-•  189, 247 

Triunion  Water  Company 148>, 

True,  A. C., petitioned  by  California  citizens 23 

Tulare  Lake- 
area 2tfl 

evaporation  (note)  75 

fluctuations,  diagram 265 


Page. 

Tulare  Lake  bed  canals 304 

Tule  District,  irrigation  situation 93 

Tllles.  The 72 

Tuolumne  River,  power  of,  transmitted  to  San  Fran- 
cisco          18 

Turner  Ditch 306 

Unappropriated  water— 

acquirement  of  right  to 67 

should  In-  declared  State  property 67, 

129, 255, 322, 349, 394, 397,  398 

stale  should  determine  extent 1X9,190,347,397 

Underground  waters 54, 198, 275, 366, 369, 384 

I'nion  Ditch  Company 148 


I'liion  of  land  and  water 38, 

:'.'.».  in.  II.  IN.  I».:V,.  lix',.:;i.s.SL>H.:il8,349,384,394 

I'M  ion  Reservoir 151 

Upper  San  .loaqllin  River  <  'anal  Company 'J'20, 246 

Use  necessary  to  secure  appropriator's  right 119 

Utah— 

California  compared  with 31 

evaporation  from  lakes  (note) 75 

riparian  rights 42 

Valencia  I  Spain  i  water  rights 40 

Value  of  irrigated  land- 
Browns  Valley 135 

California 19 

Valne  of  water,  California 35 

Vegetables,  irrigation  of,  Browns  Valley 134 

Victoria,  Australia,  riparian  rights 51 

Vischer,  H. ,  quoted 115 

Volcano  Lake,  area 125 

Water— 

a  public  utility 64 

ownership  of,  California,  necessity  for  definite  doc- 
trine         37 

rent  of 19 

value  of,  American  River 27 

value  of,  Sacramento  Valley 27 

value  of,  southern  California 25 

waste  of 19,76 

forbidden  by  law  in  Wyoming 105 

should  be  ended 318,348 

Water  commissioners — 

need  of,  California 54 

Wyoming 104 

Water  districts 67 

Water  laws  of  California — 

early  workings 7 

evolution 234 

origin 86 

reform  of,  a  State  matter 20 

Water  rates— 

Alta  Irrigation  District 294 

board  of  control  should  fix 349,398 

Centerville  and  Kingsburg  Canal 292 

Crescent  Canal 311 

fixing  of,  byState  board 319,388,395 

Fowler  Switch  Canal 291 

FresnoCanal 288 

HemetCreek 392 

Honey  Lake  Basin 108 

James  West  Side  Canal 313 

Kate ^Hays  Company 144 

Kings  Rjver  and  Fresno  Canal 286 

Last  Chance  Ditch 301 

.*•  li'tiftation  over 379,  380 

"LOS  Angeles  River 343,  344,  345 

Lower  Kings  River  Canal 


INDEX. 


411 


\V iitrr  rates — Continued.  Page. 

Moore  Ditch 175 

Mussel  Slough  Ditch 300 

Peoples  Ditch 299 

power  to  fix,  vested  in  supervisors  or  town  coun- 
cil    28, 34, 108, 175, 274, 319, 345, 379, 380, 382, 388 

result  when  iixed  by  public  authority 41 

Sacramento  Valley 27 

Salinas  Valley 200 

S:m  .loaquin  Valley 28,252 

Stimson  Canal 311 

Swcetwator  River 374,385 

Yuba  River  Basin 141 , 143, 144, 147, 152 

Water  right,  decision  regarding 379 

Water-right  contracts 53,320 

Hornet  Creek 392 

Honey  Lake  Basin 102 

Kings  River •. 321 

Salinas  Valley 200 

Sweet  water  system 386 

Water  rights— 

jieqiiirement  of 67 

Alta  Irrigation  District 294 

based  on  State  laws  and  customs 20 

Centcrville  and  Kingsbnrg  Canal 292 

Centerville  Ditch 290 

character  of,  under  California  law  not  clear 36 

declared  invalid 108 

effect  of  seepage  on 384 

extent  of  those  established  should  be  ascertained.      322 

Fn  'sno  Canal 288 

Honey  Lake  Basin,  first  law  regarding 71 

indefinite 322 

law  of 272 

nature  of,  conflicting  views  regarding 21,63 

nature  of,  on  Yuba  River 118 

necessity  for  definition  of 49, 322 

possible   extent    of    under  California    law,    not 

clear 36 

protection  of 67, 318 

sale  of,  Los  Angeles  River 345 

settlement  by  mutual  agreement,  Kings  River 317 

South  Yuba  River 152 

State  should  fix  priority  and  limitation  of 397 

State  should  limit 398 

Sunset  Irrigation  District 296 

Sweetwater  River — 

primary 377 

secondary 378 

treated  as  franchises 37, 64, 323 

unrecorded 368 

Wyoming 55 

Yuba  River  Basin 118 

Water  supply — 

importance  of  management  and  control  of 18 

law  fails  to  provide  for  determination  of 103 

Weaver  Lake  Reservoir 124,142,143 

West  Side  Canal 304 


I 'am-. 

West,  the  arid,  problems  of  new 20 

\\VMern  Canal 290 

Wheat  growing— 

Cache  Creek  Valley 163 

Sacramento  Valley 30,31 

White  Rock  Reservoir 124 

Willow  Creek 75 

adjudication  of  water  rights 95 

claims  to  water 85, 88 

flow go 

water  supply,  estimate 70 

\V i  1  low  slough 99, 101 , 102 

Willows- 
population  decreased 34 

rainfall 20 

visited 29 

Wilson,  J.  M 47, 83 

field  of  investigation 5 

report  on  Cache  Creek 155 

Windmills  around  Stockton 25 

Winter  irrigation — 

Cache  Creek  Valley 174 

San  Joaquin  Valley 27 

Woodland  Ditch.    (.See  Moore  Ditch.) 

Woods  Ravine  Ditch 149 

Work,  unnecessary  to  secure  appropriation  right 119 

Works,  J.D 47,58 

discussion  of  riparian  rights,  quoted 45 

Wright  irrigation  act 217,236,274 

reason  for  failure  of  enterprises  organized  under. .       33 

Wyoming,  constitutional  provisions  regarding  use  of 
water 105, 113 

Wyoming  irrigation  law 55,63,104 

Young  American  Lake,  area 125 

Yolo  County,  conditions  and  possibilities 187 

Yuba  River- 
acquisition  of  water  rights 118 

channel  filled  by  mining  debris 115 

claims  to  water 121 

contribution  for  investigations  on,  from  California 

Water  and  Forest  Association 6 

development  of  power 127 

diversions 128 

flow _. 115 

nature  of  water  rights 118 

origin  of  water  rights 118 

report  on,  by  Marsden  Manson 115 

report  on  use  of  water,  by  H.  D.  H.  Connick 130 

storage 121,123 

use  of  water,  diagram 127 

watershed,  physical  features  and  geology 115, 116 

Yuba  River  Basin- 
mining  rights  different  from  irrigation  rights 128 

power  stations 153 

principal  ditches  and  reservoirs 139 

rainfall 117,122,125 

Zalda  Canal 309 


RETURN  TO  the  circulation  desk  of  any 
University  of  California  Library 
or  to  the 

NORTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 
Bldg.  400,  Richmond  Field  Station 
University  of  California 
Richmond,  CA  94804-4698 


ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 
2-month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling 

(415)642-6233 
1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  bringing  books 

to  NRLF 
Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days 

prior  to  due  date 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


APR  24 1989 


YL-    tf  7  y  1 


THE  uNiyERSiTY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


